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: Admin on June 02, 2012, 11:51:09 PM
-
Madeleine McCann search: Sniffer dogs brought in to help with scrubland dig.
The two English spaniels, named Tito and Muzzy, are victim detection dogs who were also used in the search for murdered schoolgirl April Jones.
(http://i4.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/article7853557.ece/alternates/s615/dog.jpg)
South Wales Police sniffer dog Muzzy searching scrubland in Praia da Luz, Portugal.
Sniffer dogs are being used to search an area of scrubland close to where Madeleine McCann disappeared in Portugal seven years ago.
British officers, accompanied by their Portuguese counterparts, are spending a second day investigating the hilly area in the resort of Praia da Luz on the Algarve, in an unprecedented operation initiated by Scotland Yard.
Two sniffer dogs joined British police for around five minutes on a flat area of the scrubland, at the bottom of a slope.
The two English spaniels, named Tito and Muzzy, were then taken away out of sight while around 10 officers stood around in discussion.
They were then brought out again and spent a few minutes in the long grass as their handlers looked on.
South Wales Police confirmed that two specialist dog handlers and victim detection dogs were helping with the investigation.
The dogs were also used during the search for murdered schoolgirl April Jones in 2012, the force said.
Victim detection dogs can be used for finding hidden bodies as well as searching for people in disasters, and can be used in a variety of locations, including buildings, open areas and vehicles.
(http://i1.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article3640160.ece/alternates/s615/Madeleine-McCann-sniffer-dogs.jpg)
WPC Sally Richards and Tito search scrubland on the outskirts of Praia da Luz.
Specialist police teams are thought to be using ground-penetrating radar equipment to probe the search area, looking for disturbed earth.
The large section of land is being guarded day and night by armed local police with dogs, and a large yellow-and-white cordon was put in place ahead of the search for clues about Madeleine, who disappeared in May 2007 when she was just three-years-old.
The land, a few minutes' walk from the Ocean Club resort apartment where Madeleine was staying with her family, has been searched before.
A number of small tents have been erected inside the cordon, thought to be where officers are concentrating their efforts.
Around six Portuguese police vans could be seen on top of a large mound in the middle of the scrubland, which overlooks the sea.
The cordon was lowered down for two hired vans to drive in and they then reversed along a track before stopping near two blue tents.
TV crews and journalists from around the world were gathered at the cordon as the search takes place.
A British officer in plain clothes spent time studying a flat area which had been marked with tape.
He put gloves on before using a tool to make holes in the ground.
A small yellow flag could already be seen poking out within the taped section.
Local police officers on horseback patrolled the area while others had German shepherd dogs.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-search-sniffer-dogs-3640157
303
-
Scotland Yard call in victim detection dogs, seems like groundhog day !
So who will be first to discredit Tito & Muzzy ?
-
Oh go on then, might as well be me. Tito and Muzzy - what daft names!
-
It isn't a question of discrediting. It's what they do or don't find, and how this and they are presented by their handlers.
But I don't expect to see any self promoting videos.
-
Oh go on then, might as well be me. Tito and Muzzy - what daft names!
I call my dog "Come On Then" which is much more interesting. IMO.
-
I am assuming both Welsh dogs are cadaver dogs?
-
Do we really need another thread disparaging the dogs?
Really?
They are not in any sort of "race" against each other, so why compare?
-
Nothing disparaging in the thread, I'm just looking forward to the 'logical' debate regarding the differing viewpoints of the Eddie & Keela detractors and their 'spin' on the deployment (on SY's insistence) of Tito & Muzzy !
What Eddie and Keela detractors? I dont see any.
Rather i see people who just cant, or refuse to, understand the limitations of what their alerts actually mean and dont mean
Nothing wrong with the dogs per se.
-
What Eddie and Keela detractors? I dont see any.
Rather i see people who just cant, or refuse to, understand the limitations of what their alerts actually mean and dont mean
Nothing wrong with the dogs per se.
Well let's see
Their ALERTS this week in PDL have "meant" that two police forces (and their dogs, equipment, helicopters, military staff, GNR etc) have converged on a tiny scrap of land 1000m from the front door of 5a, and are now digging a small hole right in the middle of the side that lies furthest from the OC.
-
Scotland Yard call in victim detection dogs, seems like groundhog day !
So who will be first to discredit Tito & Muzzy ?
Dogs cannot be discredited. They are just markers.
It is what they find that is important. Actually the chemistry of what they find..
-
And neither do they lie, would you agree ?
I don't agree or disagree.
The dogs are used as useful markers and the idea is to use dogs to find the either alive person or a human body. Or parts of the body.
or like in case of Keala and Eddie human blood.
That later gets analised to figure out to whom this blood belongs..
That is the whole story of the dogs..
-
A rather unfortunate Freudian slip, I think you meant analysed as opposed to analised !
EVRD dogs are tasked with a specific skill set, no amount of cuing will detract an EVRD from carrying out his/her duties !
Dogs are tools. Most useful if they find dead bodies or blood..i.e the physical evidence that can be analysed a lab and possibly identified.
If no identification or no physical evidence then the dogs are useless.
-
A rather unfortunate Freudian slip, I think you meant analysed as opposed to analised !
EVRD dogs are tasked with a specific skill set, no amount of cuing will detract an EVRD from carrying out their duties !
Some peeps would claim that litmus paper was cued by its handler if they didn't like the colour it turned.
-
Some peeps would claim that litmus paper was cued by its handler if they didn't like the colour it turned.
Pegasus. You have to agree that Eddie was repeatedly cued to the Mccann hire car.
-
The dogs will rarely highlight "physical evidence", their task is to point to possible locations where "physical evidence" may be located !
A drop of blood is a physical evidence and this is what they most commonly find.
-
Pegasus. You have to agree that Eddie was repeatedly cued to the Mccann hire car.
If a litmus paper handler repeatedly cues his litmus paper towards a certain beaker, and when eventually the paper dips in, it indicates a certain acidity, I don't see how the cuing towards that beaker has influenced the signal given.
-
8-)(--) you really haven't got a clue. Tell me how he cued to alert the clothes?
Pathfinder You are at it again with the 8-)(--). Cant you moderate yourself?
As you know, I was talking about the car . Grime continually cued The Mccann hire car and kept calling Eddie back
-
Pathfinder You are at it again with the 8-)(--). Cant you moderate yourself?
As you know, I was talking about the car . Grime continually cued The Mccann hire car and kept calling Eddie back
I have always been concerned about the calling of Eddie back to the McCann's Grand Scenic hire car. Had that not happened there would not have been an alert at the drivers door.
-
I have always been concerned about the calling of Eddie back to the McCann's Grand Scenic hire car. Had that not happened there would not have been an alert at the drivers door.
The change in the dog`s behaviour led to his being called back to focus further
"When passing a vehicle I now know to be hired and in the possession of the McCann family,
the dog's behaviour changed substantially. This then produced an alert
indication at the lower part of the drivers door where the dog was biting and
barking. I recognise this behaviour as the dog indicating scent emitting from
the inside of the vehicle through the seal around the door. "
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
-
The change in the dog`s behaviour led to his being called back to focus further
"When passing a vehicle I now know to be hired and in the possession of the McCann family,
the dog's behaviour changed substantially. This then produced an alert
indication at the lower part of the drivers door where the dog was biting and
barking. I recognise this behaviour as the dog indicating scent emitting from
the inside of the vehicle through the seal around the door. "
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
What change in the dogs behaviour? Eddie was on the run away from The McCanns car when he was called back.
Perhaps he could read the McCann posters in the car window and told Grime he would be back later.
-
Scotland Yard call in victim detection dogs, seems like groundhog day !
So who will be first to discredit Tito & Muzzy ?
You need to get your facts right..no one to my knowledge has discredited the dogs on this forum...perhaps you can produce a post.
-
How about ...... views on Mr. grime, and I'm sure there are others.
When I have the time I'll check.
Don't worry you have confirmed that no one has discredited the dogs...
-
Don't worry you have confirmed that no one has discredited the dogs...
No i haven't yet.
I'll check on that one too. 8)--))
-
Everything pertaining to Madeleine McCann’s disappearance is substantially ‘different’ from other cases. It seems only 'celebrity' animals are allowed to work on her case.
For example, Tito and Muzzy have worked on many cases including as we now know that of April Jones. They are highly trained and very obviously best suited to work the terrain in Priai Da luz.
Why is it only now we know their names?
-
It seems to me that some people here spend far more time trying to twist the evidence to point to The McCanns than I ever spend trying to deflect attention away from them. I don't need to. It is obvious to any idiot that Scotland Yard believes them to be innocent.
But why would people want to twist evidence to try to involve them? That, I would like to know.
-
I was asking a question, I was not stating as fact that any member has already discredited Tito & Muzzy yet !
But it will be an interesting question when their work in PdL is finished.
well as no one has criticised eddie and Keela I don't see why you think anyone would criticise these dogs
-
The dogs will rarely highlight "physical evidence", their task is to point to possible locations where "physical evidence" may be located !
rarely highlight physical evidence..thats what their job is...EVRD ...think about what it stands for..victim recovery...finding bodies
-
well as no one has criticised eddie and Keela I don't see why you think anyone would criticise these dogs
There has been implied (not written directly) critisism of Eddie himself IMO, by some peeps:
1. After indisputably not barking at the cat when it was right in front of his nose, some peeps claim that he later did bark at the cat when it wasn't right in front of his nose.
2. Before barking at clothes in the gym, earlier that evening when being in the same room (living area at Rua Das Flores) as every one of those bits of clothing, some peeps claim he did not find and bark at those bits of clothing.
Both views (which I disagree with) imply canine inconsistency.
My opinion is that Eddie (unlike humans) is incapable of being inconsistent in his work. In the above, correct one handler interpretation IMO and get complete canine consistency. JIMO
-
There has been implied (not written directly) critisism of Eddie himself IMO, by some peeps:
1. After indisputably not barking at the cat when it was right in front of his nose, some peeps claim that he later did bark at the cat when it wasn't right in front of his nose.
2. Before barking at clothes in the gym, earlier that evening when being in the same room (living area at Rua Das Flores) as every one of those bits of clothing, some peeps claim he did not find and bark at those bits of clothing.
Both views (which I disagree with) imply canine inconsistency.
My opinion is that Eddie (unlike humans) is incapable of being inconsistent in his work. In the above, correct one handler interpretation IMO and get complete canine consistency. JIMO
eddie didn't bark at the cat full stop...grime for some reason feels that he did
-
There has been implied (not written directly) critisism of Eddie himself IMO, by some peeps:
1. After indisputably not barking at the cat when it was right in front of his nose, some peeps claim that he later did bark at the cat when it wasn't right in front of his nose.
2. Before barking at clothes in the gym, earlier that evening when being in the same room (living area at Rua Das Flores) as every one of those bits of clothing, some peeps claim he did not find and bark at those bits of clothing.
Both views (which I disagree with) imply canine inconsistency.
My opinion is that Eddie (unlike humans) is incapable of being inconsistent in his work. In the above, correct one handler interpretation IMO and get complete canine consistency. JIMO
It was a toy so he hid it. When Eddie was trained he got a toy as a reward to play with. So he hid the toy in the cupboard so he wasn't confused it was there to play with. You don't know nothing about the clothes because you can't provide any evidence of the alerted clothes being seen in the villa footage where Eddie checked. So you know nothing about the clothes and can't back up your claims!
-
eddie didn't bark at the cat full stop...grime for some reason feels that he did
Are you now an expert in handling dogs ?
-
It seems to me that some people here spend far more time trying to twist the evidence to point to The McCanns than I ever spend trying to deflect attention away from them. I don't need to. It is obvious to any idiot that Scotland Yard believes them to be innocent.
But why would people want to twist evidence to try to involve them? That, I would like to know.
That is your view, it certainly isn't everyone's.
Likewise, it hasn't been disproved that Madeleine died in the apartment.
....and SY/the police are far from infallible, as research will show.
-
That is your view, it certainly isn't everyone's.
Likewise, it hasn't been disproved that Madeleine died in the apartment.
....and SY/the police are far from infallible, as research will show.
Thank you for being polite to me. You and I might actually have a sensible conversation one day.
I agree. Nothing has been proved or disproved.
-
It was a toy so he hid it. When Eddie was trained he got a toy as a reward to play with. So he hid the toy in the cupboard so he wasn't confused it was there to play with....
I have no reason to wish to change your opinion, however I am hoping that maybe handler may think back and possibly recall, oh yes actually, the clothes in that box were actually in the living area when Eddie was searching every inch of it, lets see, do I remember where exactly in the living area those clothes were.
I might be wrong (BTW feel free to C+P those 4 words and use to enhance your posts, free of charge).
And just to clarify, in my very amateur opinion, Eddie was always correct and always consistent.
BTW somewhere I read an opinion that the 2 dogs in PDL now are better than Eddie. You say Eddie prioritised a play response and suppressed a bark response. So if I wish to conceal a body I will simply place a kermit the frog and a tennis ball on top and that will fool Eddie and Muzzy and Tito IYO?
-
So are some peeps claiming, that if you take a tennis ball with the relevant scent on it, that when Eddie or Tito or Muzzy find it, they will not signal it?
If so I think you have very much underestimated them.
-
Everything pertaining to Madeleine McCann’s disappearance is substantially ‘different’ from other cases. It seems only 'celebrity' animals are allowed to work on her case.
For example, Tito and Muzzy have worked on many cases including as we now know that of April Jones. They are highly trained and very obviously best suited to work the terrain in Priai Da luz.
Why is it only now we know their names?
Maybe because most peeps here follow only this case?
For example I know who Carla is, only because I read about a UK case where she gave two properties and presumably a vehicle an "all-clean".
And I know who Buster is, only because I read about a UK case he solved "single-nosed".
IIRC the names of the 2 dogs now in PDL and their breed and instruction language were already stated in reports about a case they worked on in UK, before they ever went to portugal.
-
Are you now an expert in handling dogs ?
davel is just using observation and common sense. You could do the same.
-
Any views on whether the current dogs are better than Eddie?
Did they get better training?
Can they detect an even smaller number of molecules?
Have they solved more crimes than Eddie did?
-
Any views on whether the current dogs are better than Eddie?
Did they get better training?
Can they detect an even smaller number of molecules?
Have they solved more crimes than Eddie did?
Don't know, but if reports in the Portuguese press are to be confirmed, they're very good at uncovering animal bones. Seems they've helped locate quite a few so far.
-
Don't know, but if reports in the Portuguese press are to be confirmed, they're very good at uncovering animal bones. Seems they've helped locate quite a few so far.
You mean they've found something they can really get their teeth into ?
-
All Cadaver Dogs will fix on the nearest odour they can find if there is no human cadaver present. This could be body fluids from live humans, or animal cadavers, including pigs on which these two were trained.
Perhaps you will provide your evidence for this statement?
-
It is from Court Testimony on Video by a Dog Handler in The Casey Anthony Case. It shouldn't be too hard to find, but I am busy at the moment.
If you don't like this reply then report me.
-
Thanks for that Mitch, can you forward a citation regarding Tito & Muzzy's training regime please, I'd be very interested in reading up further on them, thanks in anticipation.
Snip
The dogs and their handlers – regarded as the most highly-skilled team in the UK – were joined by Britain’s leading search expert, from Sussex Police, who is helping coordinate the unprecedented police operation on Portuguese soil.
Tito and Muzzy both have a powerful sense of smell that helps them locate human remains, blood and fluid a human would be unable to trace.
The dogs, who always work as a pair, have been known to find bodies 20 years after they vanished and can even detect people underwater.
They are taught from the age of 18 months using pig carcasses, which are the closest to humans.
Handler Sally Richards said recently: “They are trained to find anything from tiny specks of blood which are hard for the human eye to see to a full-sized victim, and everything in between.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-search-april-jones-3642420#ixzz33lYYLilY
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
-
Snip
The dogs and their handlers – regarded as the most highly-skilled team in the UK – were joined by Britain’s leading search expert, from Sussex Police, who is helping coordinate the unprecedented police operation on Portuguese soil.
Tito and Muzzy both have a powerful sense of smell that helps them locate human remains, blood and fluid a human would be unable to trace.
The dogs, who always work as a pair, have been known to find bodies 20 years after they vanished and can even detect people underwater.
They are taught from the age of 18 months using pig carcasses, which are the closest to humans.
Handler Sally Richards said recently: “They are trained to find anything from tiny specks of blood which are hard for the human eye to see to a full-sized victim, and everything in between.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-search-april-jones-3642420#ixzz33lYYLilY
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
Thanks for that. So normal Cadaver Dogs.
-
Snip
The dogs and their handlers – regarded as the most highly-skilled team in the UK – were joined by Britain’s leading search expert, from Sussex Police, who is helping coordinate the unprecedented police operation on Portuguese soil.
Tito and Muzzy both have a powerful sense of smell that helps them locate human remains, blood and fluid a human would be unable to trace.
The dogs, who always work as a pair, have been known to find bodies 20 years after they vanished and can even detect people underwater.
They are taught from the age of 18 months using pig carcasses, which are the closest to humans.
Handler Sally Richards said recently: “They are trained to find anything from tiny specks of blood which are hard for the human eye to see to a full-sized victim, and everything in between.”
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-search-april-jones-3642420#ixzz33lYYLilY
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
Good link. Of course, these dogs can do some remarkable things, but we all know (or should do) that they are not infallible. They may not lie, but they certainly don't always get it right. 8)--))
-
Good link. Of course, these dogs can do some remarkable things, but we all know (or should do) that they are not infallible. They may not lie, but they certainly don't always get it right. 8)--))
It depends on what you want them to find. Specks of blood to an actual cadaver, with anything in between, seems a bit of alright to me.
-
Thanks for that. So normal Cadaver Dogs.
Yes, normal cadaver dogs. They are all pretty much the same, whether their names are Eddie, Tito, Rex or Rover.
-
You are quoting 3 Daily Mirror journalists, you do realise that don't you ?
I would prefer a citation from an official government body, not the words of 3 hacks who in the same article profess that the dig site is a mere 300 yards from apartment 5A, which is patently untrue.
Perhaps you'd prefer a quote directly from one of their handlers?
PC Richards said: “They are trained from 18 months old, as that’s when they are mature enough to go on a course. We train them with different substances, but mainly pigs because they are closest to humans. They are trained to find anything from tiny specks of blood which are hard for the human eye to see to a full-sized victim, and everything in between."
-
Quote from cadaver dog handler confirming they are trained with pig carcasses can be found here:
http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/archive/2013/11/15/10812286.Search_for_missing_Newbridge_man_goes_on_as_anniversary_nears/?ref=arc
-
You are quoting 3 Daily Mirror journalists, you do realise that don't you ?
I would prefer a citation from an official government body, not the words of 3 hacks who in the same article profess that the dig site is a mere 300 yards from apartment 5A, which is patently untrue.
You will have to put in an FOI Request to The Welsh Police for that. But no doubt they will be delighted to respond. As if they haven't got better things to do.
Oh, and could you ask how much they get paid?
-
Where does PC Richards make this statement ? Link or citation please !
Count up four posts from this one for the link.
-
So once again you post on this thread with out corroborating citations, no surprise there !
I've told you where to find it. You look for it.
-
Quote from cadaver dog handler confirming they are trained with pig carcasses can be found here:
http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/archive/2013/11/15/10812286.Search_for_missing_Newbridge_man_goes_on_as_anniversary_nears/?ref=arc
So what Eddie didn't alert to a dead pig in 5A. They all train with them but you see dead humans being found in cases not dead pigs unless you can show me some reports where cadaver dogs have found dead pigs instead of missing people?
-
And I would do this why exactly ?
You want to know. You keep on asking for corroboration. These are the people to tell you.
PS. Could you post it up when you get it?
Thanks in Advance.
-
So what Eddie didn't alert to a dead pig in 5A. They all train with them but you see dead humans being found in cases not dead pigs unless you can show me some reports where cadaver dogs have found dead pigs instead of missing people?
If these dogs were trained to react to smell of the rotting pig meat, they would be hitting on every rubbish container, kitchen, butchery and restaurant in the area. In other words they would be totally useless.
And the retrievers are trained first with the sticks, but you can bet your rear end they are not retrieving the sticks during the hunt.
-
All Cadaver Dogs will fix on the nearest odour they can find if there is no human cadaver present. This could be body fluids from live humans, or animal cadavers, including pigs on which these two were trained.
That is a sweeping generalisation Eleanor and not entirely factually correct. Bearing in mind that most victim recovery dogs are trained using pig remains (using human remains is illegal in the UK) it does not follow that they will alert to other animals. In fact, since every dog is different and experiences similar but not identical training it cannot be assumed that every VRD will only alert to pigs or humans.
For the record, Eddie was different, he was labeled as an Enhanced VRD specifically because in addition to the normal training with baby pig carcasses he received special training in the USA using human cadaver.
-
That is a sweeping generalisation Eleanor and not entirely factually correct. Bearing in mind that most victim recovery dogs are trained using pig remains (using human remains is illegal in the UK) it does not follow that they will alert to other animals. In fact, since every dog is different and experiences similar but not identical training it cannot be assumed that every VRD will only alert to pigs or humans.
For the record, Eddie was different, he was labeled as an Enhanced VRD specifically because in addition to the normal training with baby pig carcasses he received special training in the USA using human cadaver.
Eddie was never taken to The US of A and trained on Human Cadaver while he was owned by The Yorkshire Police, and therefor not before he went to PdL.
It is an illegal practice in The UK.
Or are you telling me that The UK Police are allowed to ship their Victim Recovery Dogs across The Atlantic to be trained in a way that is illegal in Britain?
-
Oh Look!
Another "dogs are crap" attempt.
Seems irrelevant that those crap dogs have been flown back into PDL to help for the search.
Call them up and tell them they are wasting good tax payers money deploying useless animals.
-
Eddie was never taken to The US of A and trained on Human Cadaver while he was owned by The Yorkshire Police, and therefor not before he went to PdL.
It is an illegal practice in The UK.
Or are you telling me that The UK Police are allowed to ship their Victim Recovery Dogs across The Atlantic to be trained in a way that is illegal in Britain?
I am sorry but you are simply misinformed Eleanor. Eddie received enhanced training in human cadavers at a FBI facility in the US before Martin went to Portugal. It might be illegal to train dogs using human cadavers in the UK but there is nothing to stop anyone travelling to the US to train.
Someone also commented earlier that Eddie would alert to pork products such as waste found in bins etc. This is not the case as Eddie alerted to decomposing pig meat, not foodstuffs.
Buzz posted the extract from Martin's Report to the Portuguese which contains all this information.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
-
I am sorry but you are simply misinformed Eleanor. Eddie received enhanced training in human cadavers at a FBI facility in the US before Martin went to Portugal. It might be illegal to train digs using human cadavers in the UK but there is nothing to stop anyone travelling to the US to train.
Someone also commented earlier that Eddie would alert to pork products such as waste found in bins etc. This is not the case as Eddie alerted to decomposing pig meat, not foodstuffs.
Buzz posted the extract from Martin's Report to the Portuguese which contains all this information.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
Dear John, I have to wonder who paid for this trip to America as Eddie was owned by The Yorkshire Police at the time and I just can't see them allowing one of their handlers to take one of their dogs to America, and paying for it, especially as this practice was and still is illegal in Britain.
-
I confess, I've not read the whole of the thread, so apologies if this point has already been made, but the key point of interest here is that you have two dogs and two handlers, just as it should have been first time around; and just as (I'm fairly certain) the Portuguese dog-handlers operated their dogs (with a one-to-one handler-to-dog-ratio) ...
-
Dear John, I have to wonder who paid for this trip to America as Eddie was owned by The Yorkshire Police at the time and I just can't see them allowing one of their handlers to take one of their dogs to America, and paying for it, especially as this practice was and still is illegal in Britain.
I would have thought the point was fairly obvious Eleanor. The dog would be better trained.
-
I would have thought the point was fairly obvious Eleanor. The dog would be better trained.
It is illegal in Britain to train dogs on human cadaver. So are you saying that The Police broke the law by allowing one of their dogs to be taken to America to be involved in an illegal practice?
Incidentally, you should read that Cite by Buzz. It does not say that Eddie was taken to America. It says that a scent was collected using remote technical equipment. This method is comparable to the simulation of cross contamination, etc. Not that I expect anyone to take notice of this. If you want to believe that Eddie was taken to America while Martin Grime was still employed by The Yorkshire police then be my guest.
A cadaver dog can find tiny specks of blood to a full blown corpse, and anything in between.
-
It is illegal in Britain to train dogs on human cadaver. So are you saying that The Police broke the law by allowing one of their dogs to be taken to America to be involved in an illegal practice?
Incidentally, you should read that Cite by Buzz. It does not say that Eddie was taken to America. It says that a scent was collected using remote technical equipment. This method is comparable to the simulation of cross contamination, etc. Not that I expect anyone to take notice of this. If you want to believe that Eddie was taken to America while Martin Grime was still employed by The Yorkshire police then be my guest.
A cadaver dog can find tiny specks of blood to a full blown corpse, and anything in between.
How is it breaking the law, by taking the dog to to America ?
There it is legal.
Perhaps you should read John's response earlier.
Also, why don't you contact West Yorkshire Police on the issue ?
-
How is it breaking the law, by taking the dog to to America ?
There it is legal.
Perhaps you should read John's response earlier.
Also, why don't you contact West Yorkshire Police on the issue ?
As I said, I just can't see The Police allowing one of their handlers to take one of their dogs to America to be involved in a practice that is illegal in Britain. I don't know why it is illegal in Britain, but there will be a reason.
John should read the Cite from Buzz. it does not say that Eddie was taken to America while Martin Grime was employed by, and Eddie was owned by The Yorkshire Police. Although Martin Grime might have taken Eddie after he bought the dog from The Police, and retired.
Why would I contact The West Yorkshire Police? I can read you know.
-
It is rather simple -
The dogs didn't alert in the apartments of the other members of the Tapas group - none of the children of the other Tapas members are missing.
The dogs did alert in the McCann's apartment - one of their children is missing.
That is true, it is also true that Eddie spent longer at 5A than he did in other apartments - the same applies to the cars. As we know from the videos - sniffer dogs do not necessarily go straight to an 'object/area by any means - and so unless the same amount of time is given to each search to give the dogs the same chance at each location - we do not know if Eddie would have alerted in other places. The chances of there being nothing 'detectable' i.e. blood for example, being deposited in any other apartment or in any other car during the preceding years are too minute to be realistic IMO.
Anyway - been there done that - and I don't intend to get bogged down in yet another 'dog' saga which has already been done to death a trillion times.
You have your opinion - I have mine. We will have to agree to disagree.
-
That is true, it is also true that Eddie spent longer at 5A than he did in other apartments - the same applies to the cars. As we know from the videos - sniffer dogs do not necessarily go straight to an 'object/area by any means - and so unless the same amount of time is given to each search to give the dogs the same chance at each location - we do not know if Eddie would have alerted in other places. The chances of there being nothing 'detectable' i.e. blood for example, being deposited in any other apartment or in any other car during the preceding years are too minute to be realistic IMO.
Anyway - been there done that - and I don't intend to get bogged down in yet another 'dog' saga which has already been done to death a trillion times.
You have your opinion - I have mine. We will have to agree to disagree.
Agreed. The only thing worth noting with respect to those dog searches is that they found sweet FA of any forensic interest. The reason they barked is anyone's guess, but the fact is there was nothing there that could corroborate a genuine alert.
Seven years later, people still don't seem to understand this, but then there are a lot of things some people seem incapable of understanding and ultimately that's their problem.
-
It is rather simple -
The dogs didn't alert in the apartments of the other members of the Tapas group - none of the children of the other Tapas members are missing.
The dogs did alert in the McCann's apartment - one of their children is missing.
It really is that simple
People struggle to come up with all sorts of flakey explanations whilst determindely avoiding the obvious one
A dog, who is trained to bark when he picks up the scent of death, barked in the apartment from which a child disappeared, never to be seen again
-
It really is that simple
People struggle to come up with all sorts of flakey explanations whilst determindely avoiding the obvious one
A dog, who is trained to bark when he picks up the scent of death, barked in the apartment from which a child disappeared, never to be seen again
So what Martin Grime tells us is flakey? He is the expert who gave various reasons unrelated to a dead body as to why Eddie would bark. If some people want to ignore them because they don't suit what they want to believe - that is not my problem. A court would take a different view.
Must go out now.
-
So what Martin Grime tells us is flakey? He is the expert who gave various reasons unrelated to a dead body as to why Eddie would bark. If some people want to ignore them because they don't suit what they want to believe - that is not my problem. A court would take a different view.
Must go out now.
Benice, you, and others, can come up with as many 'explanations' as you like, but the fact is I cannot get beyond that cadaver dog throwing his head back and barking with such certainty in the apartment where a little girl was last seen alive
That's the thing, you see ... that dog didn't know that a child had disappeared. He barked because he detected a scent he was trained to pick up, and he picked it up there, there in the apartment she disappeared from
-
In the absence of Eddie & Keela, what evidence would there have been to suggest that Madeleine died in that apartment?
-
In the absence of Eddie & Keela, what evidence would there have been to suggest that Madeleine died in that apartment?
A burglar with a burgundy T-shirt & a very unhealthy interest in british girls, apparently.
-
Benice, you, and others, can come up with as many 'explanations' as you like, but the fact is I cannot get beyond that cadaver dog throwing his head back and barking with such certainty in the apartment where a little girl was last seen alive
That's the thing, you see ... that dog didn't know that a child had disappeared. He barked because he detected a scent he was trained to pick up, and he picked it up there, there in the apartment she disappeared from
He barked to please his owner -- after repeated direction and re-direction (and an interminable length of time) reinforced his instinct that that is what was required.
Oh, and he barked to get his toy back that had been hidden in the cupboard ...
-
He barked to please his owner -- after repeated direction and re-direction (and an interminable length of time) reinforced his instinct that that is what was required.
Oh, and he barked to get his toy back that had been hidden in the cupboard ...
And he barked at the dead pig that was buried under the bush in the back garden.
-
And he barked at the dead pig that was buried under the bush in the back garden.
The garden had recently been fertilised, and there is a pig-based fertiliser ...
-
A burglar with a burgundy T-shirt & a very unhealthy interest in british girls, apparently.
Or was he a binman, or maybe a drug baron, or a fake charity collector? It's getting so confusing, I've lost track of just where we are.
-
And he barked at the dead pig that was buried under the bush in the back garden.
We never did hear if Eddie was taken back to the garden the next morning. Or did we?
-
We never did hear if Eddie was taken back to the garden the next morning. Or did we?
If they took that alert seriously, it's odd that they didn't dig the garden up.
Or did they?
-
The garden had recently been fertilised, and there is a pig-based fertiliser ...
Well that's it then, you've convinced me.
All the dogs alerts are fully accountable in the context of them not being alerts to Madeleines dead body.
That's why SY are out there right now, digging in search of a live child.
-
Well that's it then, you've convinced me.
All the dogs alerts are fully accountable in the context of them not being alerts to Madeleines dead body.
That's why SY are out there right now, digging in search of a live child.
<sigh>
Have they re-visited apartment 5a?
-
So they are re-visiting areas Eddie already combed and didn't alert to.
Why is that?
-
So they are re-visiting areas Eddie already combed and didn't alert to.
Why is that?
Yes, I heard that The Dogs were taken over to search places like this. Or were they?
-
So they are re-visiting areas Eddie already combed and didn't alert to.
Why is that?
Are they?
-
Pour cold water on the dogs.
-
In the absence of Eddie & Keela, what evidence would there have been to suggest that Madeleine died in that apartment?
according to grime there is no evidence that maddie died in the apartment...I think its a disgrace that these posters want to rubbish the conclusions of an expert like grime
-
Are they?
If they aren't, then the re-deployment of the dogs has nothing to do with Eddie.
And if they are, they can't have had much faith in the deployment of the dog first time around.
Take your pick.
-
The fact that the Met are investigating eight suspects in Portugal, and have been given permission by Portuguese authorities to do so, strongly indicates that neither the Met or Portuguese authorities believe a video of grime and his dogs is worth the time of day. It certainly isn't the foundation of this investigation.
-
So they are re-visiting areas Eddie already combed and didn't alert to.
Why is that?
Not correct IMO.
Eddie did examine about 6 areas of scrubland, I will post a map.
Their selection was by the UK search expertise of the NPIA.
The two scrubland areas being searched this week and next (1. south of Rua 25 Abril, and 2. west of Rua 1 Maio) are different to the scrubland areas searched by Eddie
-
Not correct IMO.
Eddie did examine about 6 areas of scrubland, I will post a map.
Their selection was by the UK search expertise of the NPIA.
The two scrubland areas being searched this week and next (1. south of Rua 25 Abril, and 2. west of Rua 1 Maio) are different to the scrubland areas searched by Eddie
Thanks Pegasus. I'm useless at maps.
-
External EVRD searches 2007 and 2014 compared
I have omitted internal EVRD searches of houses and apartments. This map covers only outdoor EVRD searches.
Purple: Block 5.
Red: Two sightings of unconcealed carrying.
Yellow: Six areas selected by UK police (NPIA Wyboston) for search by EVRD (Eddie) in 2007. These are the six for which I found definite evidence that they did take place. Five of these six outdoor locations were given the all-clean by the EVRD, and one was signalled. BTW the source for the 4 areas north of Rua Ramalhete is Volume 8 Page 2058.
Green: Four areas reported in press as being selected by UK police for search by EVRD (Muzzy and Tito) in 2014. Up to 6 June actual EVRD search has been observed at one of these sites.
Click the map to enlarge it.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
By way of clarification.
Forum rules require that information is corroborated where possible. Martin Grime confirmed in his report to the Portuguese prior to the dog deployments that EVRD Eddie received additional training in association with the FBI in the USA using human cadavers. I have had this information verbally confirmed to me more recently. Unless anyone can provide proof to the contrary this information stands as corroborated.
-
By way of clarification.
Forum rules require that information is corroborated where possible. Martin Grime confirmed in his report to the Portuguese prior to the dog deployments that EVRD Eddie received additional training in association with the FBI in the USA using human cadavers. I have had this information verbally confirmed to me more recently. Unless anyone can provide proof to the contrary this information stands as corroborated.
When and how was this achieved?
-
When and how was this achieved?
Two foi questions and answers:
Dear [name deleted],
With regard to your request in relation to:
"1. Can you confirm that the cadaver dog "Eddie", formerly a police dog under
dog handler and dog instructor Martin Grime, now retired from your force, was
sent to America to be trained on human cadavers and be upgraded to "enhanced"
victim recovery dog?
2. Can you confirm that South Yorkshire Police uses, or has used, an American
device for trapping scents, a "Scent Transfer Unit" or "STU100" in the
training of its cadaver dogs?"
RESPONSE
1. South Yorkshire Police holds information which would tend to confirm this part of your request. This information is contained within the anual Personal Development Review of retired PC GRIME for the year 2005/2006 and states at various points,
"(PC GRIMES) has deployed police dog 'Eddie' to train on human remains in the US. This training has been valuable as it is not possible to utilise human remains in the UK. A full report from the F.B.I. to document his training and operational deployments whilst in America remains pending"
"Deployments have been on a national scale and a recent visit to the F.B.I. in America has created some income generation potential in terms of training."
"Complete sponsored visit to FBI to educate on C.S.I. Dog capabilities - Achieved"
2. From enquiries I have made it would appear that South Yorkshire Police have not deployed or used a device known as a 'Scent Transfer Unit' or 'STU100' within Force either operationally or for evaluation. However the Force does hold information that would indicate that Mr GRIME, whilst serving with this Force IN 2006, did utilise such a device whilst engageD in another Force area. A section of a statement apparently made but not signed by Mr GRIME reads: -
" I developed the training of the E.V.R.D. to include the screening of scent pads taken from motor vehicles by a ST 100 Scent Tranference Unit.
The unit is designed in a two main-part design. The main body is a battery operated electrical device that draws air in at to the front and exhausts through the rear. Ther is no 're-circulation' of air within the unit. The second main part is a 'grilled' hood that fits to the main body. A sterile gauze pad is fitted into the hood. When operated the ST 100 draws air through the hood and the sterile gauze pad and exhausts through ports to the rear. 'Scent' is trapped in the gauze, which may then be stored for use within scent discrimination exercises.
The ST 100 unit is cleaned following use in such a manner that no residual scent is apparent. This is checked by control measures where the dog is allowed to search a given area where the S100 is secreted. Any response by the dog would suggest contamination. Tests have shown that the decontamination procedures are effective in this case with the dog NOT alerting to the device when completed.
Use of the ST100 is recommended when subject vehicles, property, clothing, premises are to be forensically protected from contamination by the dog, and for covert deployment. At all other times best practice would be for the dog to be given direct access.
Operational use of the STU 100 is in a developmental stage"
If you are unhappy with the way your request for information has been handled, you can request a review by following the advice contained in the separate notice attached to this correspondence:
If you remain dissatisfied with the handling of your request or complaint, you have a right to appeal to the Information Commissioner at:
The Information Commissioner's Office,
Wycliffe House,
Water Lane,
Wilmslow,
Cheshire, SK9 5AF.
Telephone: 08456 306060 or 01625 545745
Website: www.ico.gov.uk
There is no charge for making an appeal.
Yours sincerely
The follow-up quetion:
Freedom of Information Request - Reference No:20110231
REQUEST
Following a response to request 20110186]
Can I ask, did that FBI report described as 'pending' turn up?
RESPONSE
SYP did not receive a report, therefore there is `no information held'.
-
Thank You.
-
The other point I always found intriguing is this, from the first FOI answer:
Deployments have been on a national scale
Is that supposed to mean that dogs from all over the country went?
If so, why do we only hear about Eddie?
-
I've just gone back and read the whole of this thread.
Glad I did.
Some interesting reading ...
-
IMO thanks heavens the NPIA expert in 2007 made the recommendation to bring in an EVRD.
-
Very interesting reading on this forum -- informative, but a lot of entrenched views from self-proclaimed experts, whose reasoning skills seem to be entirely inductive.
Having read through the forum, and documents, and expert analysis. I'd stress the following regarding the dogs.
- It is highly probable that they detected cadaver smell.
- It is possible, given that she spent time there, that the smell is from Madeleine.
- It is possible, given that Mrs McCann was a doctor, that it was a cadaver odour transferred from the numerous corpses that she came into contact with through her job.
- It is possible, given that the apartment was frequently inhabited by other families, that cadaver odour transferred from their stays.
And similar reasoning can be used with regard to the garden area and the hire car.
Given that there was no forensic evidence to build on the dogs, the evidence does not stand up, nor would it ever stand up in a court of law.
Thus, I find it somewhat interesting that so many view the dogs as concrete proof of the McCanns' guilt. It must be interesting to have a mind that jumps to conclusions that aren't based on logical reasoning...
-
- It is possible, given that Mrs McCann was a doctor, that it was a cadaver odour transferred from the numerous corpses that she came into contact with through her job.
You really think that a doctor would have such a poor hygiene to reek with dead bodies and wear during the holidays the unwashed clothes from work? Seriously? And how often a part-time anesthesiologist gets in contact with decomposing bodies?
-
- It is highly probable that they detected cadaver smell.
...
Several interesting points in your post. Answering here only the first:
Only one of the dogs (Eddie) was trained to signal cadaver scent.
So I would (and please forgive me if I am wrong about that) rephrase your first point as:
"It is highly probable that he (Eddie) detected cadaver scent"
With that, I agree completely.
-
You really think that a doctor would have such a poor hygiene to reek with dead bodies and wear during the holidays the unwashed clothes from work? Seriously? And how often a part-time anesthesiologist gets in contact with decomposing bodies?
Part time GP actually.
The chances of a GP being in contact with a dead body are very slime indeed.
-
Pathfinder - again you jump to the conclusion that the cadaver smell in the places you identify was connected to Mrs McCann.
And second, you assume that the cadaver dog was accurate. We only know that he was probably accurate in detecting cadaver smell.
You have a problem differentiating between facts that can be established, and your imagination. Or so it seems.
-
Pathfinder - again you jump to the conclusion that the cadaver smell in the places you identify was connected to Mrs McCann.
And second, you assume that the cadaver dog was accurate. We only know that he was probably accurate in detecting cadaver smell.
You have a problem differentiating between facts that can be established, and your imagination. Or so it seems.
No the cadaver came from the missing child not the mother.
-
What was found behind the sofa was blood. And it was traced to DNA of two PJ policemen.
-
What was found behind the sofa was blood. And it was traced to DNA of two PJ policemen.
Eddie could smell the cadaver way before that sofa was moved so he could get behind it to alert.
-
Eddie could smell the cadaver way before that sofa was moved so he could get behind it to alert.
Eddie was trained to trace both cadaver and blood. He found blood. We know it was blood because it was identified as blood in the lab. The blood belonged to the two policemen. Who are btw alive.
My source are the files which I have read. What is yours?
-
Eddie was trained to trace both cadaver and blood. He found blood. We know it was blood because it was identified as blood in the lab. The blood belonged to the two policemen. Who are btw alive.
Keela has to get in real close with her nose to alert to microscopic blood. Eddie goes in first for cadaver then Keela comes in to find if there's blood where Eddie has alerted. No blood at the wardrobe.
-
Keela has to get in real close with her nose to alert to microscopic blood. Eddie goes in first for cadaver then Keela comes in to find if there's blood where Eddie has alerted. No blood at the wardrobe.
What wardrobe?
You were talking about behind the sofa. Eddie identified blood there.
-
What wardrobe?
You were talking about behind the sofa. Eddie identified blood there.
Eddie barked at the wardrobe. What do you think he was barking there for? microscopic blood found behind the sofa.
-
Eddie was trained to trace both cadaver and blood. He found blood. We know it was blood because it was identified as blood in the lab. The blood belonged to the two policemen. Who are btw alive.
My source are the files which I have read. What is yours?
Good point, I have actually considered whether this could be interpreted to mean that the sofa signal might be irrelevant to this case, for example if the floor tiler in mid 1990's had cut his hand.
Also, whether to eliminate the garden and balcony signals, for example a gardener's cut on the climbing plant, with rain washing away the blood itself.
This would considerably simplify the case, leaving just one one location at the apartment (in/near wardrobe) being relevant, for there Keela, despite being lifted up, did not signal, and there is no rain.
-
Part time GP actually.
The chances of a GP being in contact with a dead body are very slime indeed.
GPs issue death certificates.
However Dr Kate McCann did not claim to have been in contact with six dead bodies before starting her holiday.
-
Good point, I have actually considered whether this could be interpreted to mean that the sofa signal might be irrelevant to this case, for example if the floor tiler in mid 1990's had cut his hand.
Also, whether to eliminate the garden and balcony signals, for example a gardener's cut on the climbing plant, with rain washing away the blood itself.
This would considerably simplify the case, leaving just one one location at the apartment (in/near wardrobe) being relevant, for there Keela, despite being lifted up, did not signal, and there is no rain.
It wasn't the floor tiler. It was the two policemen's DNA.
Same as the car fob. It was Gerry McCanns DNA. And Gerry is alive too..
I studied science. You have three places alerted and the lab report comes back with the DNA of three alive people.
Sorry but scientifically this is a big percentage that this dog alerts only on live people.
-
It wasn't the floor tiler. It was the two policemen's DNA.
Same as the car fob. It was Gerry McCanns DNA. And Gerry is alive too..
I studied science. You have three places alerted and the lab report comes back with the DNA of three alive people.
Sorry but scientifically this is a big percentage that this dog alerts only on live people.
Was the two police dna on the floor tiles? A page number would be useful.
Keela did not signal in/near the wardrobe, so the signal there by Eddie cannot be to blood, it must be to something other than blood?
-
Was the two police dna on the floor tiles? A page number would be useful.
Keela did not signal in/near the wardrobe, so the signal there by Eddie cannot be to blood, it must be to something other than blood?
This is true, it could have been cadaverscent. But as Grime tells us - there are several innocent reasons why cadaverscent might be present. He also says that the scent can drift from one place to another and so it's untrue to claim that Eddie was definitely barking at the wardrobe.
-
This is true, it could have been cadaverscent. But as Grime tells us - there are several innocent reasons why cadaverscent might be present. He also says that the scent can drift from one place to another and so it's untrue to claim that Eddie was definitely barking at the wardrobe.
But he had a good sniff on that shelf before barking his head off if you watch the footage closely.
-
Yes, the handler says the residual scent signalled by Eddie near the wardrobe may have migrated from elsewhere in the same room. I am applying my own method of looking to see if the dog sniffs a specific location immediately before barking, and here he did, a particular shelf.
-
Was the two police dna on the floor tiles? A page number would be useful.
Keela did not signal in/near the wardrobe, so the signal there by Eddie cannot be to blood, it must be to something other than blood?
behind the sofa:
286- 286A/2007-CRL 5A & B Swabs collected from the wall of the apartment ---- In my opinion, Fernando Viegas could have contributed DNA to this result.
/2007-CRL (17) Cement-glue [grouting] between the floor tiles identified as number 2 ---- In my opinion, the major part of the profile matched that of Lino Henriques.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm
Re cadaver scent and wardrobe: I read somewhere, cannot really remember where that the cadaver in children due to low body fat and high muscle mass would develop much later than in an adult. This would even extend the time the dead body had to be in that wardrobe and it is impossible because Madeleine was seen in creche and by David Payne ( independent from the parents).
This is why I think this scenario is impossible and there was never a dead body in that apartment.
If you look at the GNR dogs handlers reports which should be the most reliable as they were soonest on the crime scene then Madeleine left this apartment alive and was walking. This is my opinion. When judging between the cadaver dogs which also both alert on anyone's blood and with report of GNR dogs which were specifically looking for Madeleine I tend to trust the GNR dogs more. Why? Because they were brought in quite soon and they were looking specifically for Madeleine on a fresh crime scene. There was 4 dogs and they all followed the same route so mathematically speaking their findings should be trusted more..
-
behind the sofa:
286- 286A/2007-CRL 5A & B Swabs collected from the wall of the apartment ---- In my opinion, Fernando Viegas could have contributed DNA to this result.
/2007-CRL (17) Cement-glue [grouting] between the floor tiles identified as number 2 ---- In my opinion, the major part of the profile matched that of Lino Henriques.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm
Thanks for providing the source.
It is, however, speculation that one of these two officers bled.
If the reason for both dogs' alerts behind the sofa is irrelevant blood, I would think the floor tiler mid 90s more likely than either officer.
-
Both attending PJ officers sustained cuts to their bodies ???
Really ? How did this happen and under what circumstances ?
Out of all DNA results there is 3x family member 2x these two police officers and one result if I remeber well was unknown
But it would be great if anyone who likes talking about the dogs learns what the dogs pointed at and what that produced in the lab..
-
DNA testing now is much improved from 2007. I wondr if they retested.
-
... I read somewhere, cannot really remember where that the cadaver in children due to low body fat and high muscle mass would develop much later than in an adult. This would even extend the time ...
Interesting. The only experiment I know of already indicates a long time, and what you say may possibly extend it further. And there is a live sighting much later than the one you mention. So this presents a scenario of time which indeed appears at first sight to be absolutely impossible. But IMO it's fairly elementary, there's a human false assumption in there.
-
Interesting. The only experiment I know of already indicates a long time, and what you say may possibly extend it further. And there is a live sighting much later than the one you mention. So this presents a scenario of time which indeed appears at first sight to be absolutely impossible. But IMO it's fairly elementary, there's a human false assumption in there.
Well.. we wait and see. IMO we now have two excellent teams both PJ and SY who are both very keen to resolve this crime.
-
No no no, you have stated as fact that the two police officers DNA (from bleeding) were discovered in 5A, where is this recorded ?
No more weasel words, YOU have stated a supposed fact, back it up or retract !
Mathematics.
Both dogs alerted there. If both dogs - that means blood. Lab tested showed DNA of Police officers to me meaning this was blood from police officers.
-
Mathematics.
Both dogs alerted there. If both dogs - that means blood. Lab tested showed DNA of Police officers to me meaning this was blood from police officers.
So you're an expert in forensics ? 8)--))
-
grime was honest enough to admit that the alerts had no evidential value without corroboration and as just about everyone involved in the case accepts maddie may still be alive...no one takes the alerts as conclusive evidence
-
Its not really important..grime has told us himself that the alerts have no evidential value..remember
Well you've got nothing to worry about, have you. 8((()*/
-
Eddie was flawed as a cadaver dog, although through no fault of his. He had been used for too long in searching for blood and live humans. And successfully. This was his original purpose, and he was never going to unlearn that.
-
Eddie was flawed as a cadaver dog, although through no fault of his. He had been used for too long in searching for blood and live humans. And successfully. This was his original purpose, and he was never going to unlearn that.
That is your opinion, but it certainly isn't everyone's.
-
There are two very significant differences at first glance between the way these two dogs are being used in PDL and the previous pair.
The first difference is that these dogs are being allowed to do their job with minimal interference from the handler. In PDL Martin Grime was constantly directing, re-directing over and over when his dogs (particularly the EVRD dog) was moving around. It is absolutely clear from the videos of the dogs in action this week and last week that the handlers are not doing that kind of thing. The dogs are allowed a much freer rein to search and wander as their noses suggest.
https://vimeo.com/97708837
The second difference is that these dogs are clearly being handled by uniformed UK police officers. It is my understanding having asked a working police dog handler that, when undertaking their work, dog handlers are supposed to wear their uniform.
-
Eddie was flawed as a cadaver dog, although through no fault of his. He had been used for too long in searching for blood and live humans. And successfully. This was his original purpose, and he was never going to unlearn that.
I agree on this.
-
Those dogs were very well paid for being excellent at their job. They didn't find live humans or dead pigs. They solved cases of missing people. You can't prove that the dogs were wrong and now they're looking for a body they believe the dogs were correct.
A Team of Ulster detectives yesterday heaped praise on a heroic sniffer dog which helped them nail evil killer Trevor Hamilton.
Springer Spaniel Eddie, which was brought over from the South Yorkshire Victim Recovery Dog Unit, was hailed as instrumental in securing the conviction against the rapist and murderer.
Hamilton (23) received what could turn out to be the longest prison sentence in Northern Ireland's legal history yesterday. He was jailed for life with no possibility of release for the murder of Attracta Harron.
Speaking about Eddie's contribution to the investigation, a PSNI spokeswoman for the detectives said:
"These dogs were trained to locate any traces of human remains. "Eddie was tasked to examine a number of cars parked in the secure compound at Strabane police station. "One of the cars was a burnt-out shell of a red Hyundai Lantra that had been seized by police investigating the murder of Attracta Harron.
"Trevor Hamilton had admitted driving the car on the day Attracta went missing."
DNA from a piece of cloth removed from the car for testing was found to be a one in a billion match for Attracta.
Eddie was the first recovery dog ever to be tasked to examine a vehicle or scene that had been subjected to so much heat and water.
http://murderpedia.org/male.H/h/hamilton-trevor-william.htm
-
Those dogs were very well paid for being excellent at their job. They didn't find live humans or dead pigs. They solved cases of missing people. You can't prove that the dogs were wrong and now they're looking for a body they believe the dogs were correct.
A Team of Ulster detectives yesterday heaped praise on a heroic sniffer dog which helped them nail evil killer Trevor Hamilton.
Springer Spaniel Eddie, which was brought over from the South Yorkshire Victim Recovery Dog Unit, was hailed as instrumental in securing the conviction against the rapist and murderer.
Hamilton (23) received what could turn out to be the longest prison sentence in Northern Ireland's legal history yesterday. He was jailed for life with no possibility of release for the murder of Attracta Harron.
Speaking about Eddie's contribution to the investigation, a PSNI spokeswoman for the detectives said:
"These dogs were trained to locate any traces of human remains. "Eddie was tasked to examine a number of cars parked in the secure compound at Strabane police station. "One of the cars was a burnt-out shell of a red Hyundai Lantra that had been seized by police investigating the murder of Attracta Harron.
"Trevor Hamilton had admitted driving the car on the day Attracta went missing."
DNA from a piece of cloth removed from the car for testing was found to be a one in a billion match for Attracta.
Eddie was the first recovery dog ever to be tasked to examine a vehicle or scene that had been subjected to so much heat and water.
http://murderpedia.org/male.H/h/hamilton-trevor-william.htm
Giveth to the dog that which is the dog's.
And extracteth from the Handler that which should be extracted ...
There was never anything wrong with the (I gather now late) Springer Spaniel sniffer dog Eddie's nose ...
I don't think anyone has ever suggested otherwise ...
-
Giveth to the dog that which is the dog's.
And extracteth from the Handler that which should be extracted ...
There was never anything wrong with the (I gather now late) Springer Spaniel sniffer dog Eddie's nose ...
I don't think anyone has ever suggested otherwise ...
Just admit it you haven't got a clue what you're going on about. Those dogs are well respected so I don't think Grime is losing any sleep over your pathetic games. Eddie went straight into the car and alerted in the Harron case which didn't happen in the McCann one so he was chasing the scent coming from the car. The police believe the dogs alerted to the dead body of the missing child because all the alerts connects to them and nowhere else. And cadaver dogs are being used right now in the new searches.
-
Just admit it you haven't got a clue what you're going on about. Those dogs are well respected so I don't think Grime is losing any sleep over your pathetic games. Eddie went straight into the car and alerted in the Harron case which didn't happen in the McCann one so he was chasing the scent coming from the car. The police believe the dogs alerted to the dead body of the missing child because all the alerts connects to them and nowhere else. And cadaver dogs are being used right now in the new searches.
In the Harron case there was no ambiguity about the nature of the crime which had been committed ...
Mrs Harron's body was found in an advanced state of decomposition some distance from the car.
-
In the Harron case there was no ambiguity about the nature of the crime which had been committed ...
Mrs Harron's body was found in an advanced state of decomposition some distance from the car.
Yes I know super dog Eddie found the body aswell 8)--))
Constable John Ellis, said he realised the dog operated by his team-mate Martin Grime, a dog called "Eddie", a Springer Spaniel, had found something, because of his barking.
He added he continued searching with his dog "Frankie" a Border Collie, and that when he approached Constable Grime`s position, "there was a distinct smell of decay".
Constable Grime had told the court that as he searched the hedgerows and riverbank "Eddie" jumped into the stream and at one stage was being swept away by the current.
However, the dog managed to swim back up and jumped unto a pile of stones on the further bank and started barking.
"I immediately noted that he had found something and I made my way to the bank and saw what he had found," said Constable Grime.
-
Yes I know super dog Eddie found the body aswell 8)--))
Constable John Ellis, said he realised the dog operated by his team-mate Martin Grime, a dog called "Eddie", a Springer Spaniel, had found something, because of his barking.
He added he continued searching with his dog "Frankie" a Border Collie, and that when he approached Constable Grime`s position, "there was a distinct smell of decay".
Constable Grime had told the court that as he searched the hedgerows and riverbank "Eddie" jumped into the stream and at one stage was being swept away by the current.
However, the dog managed to swim back up and jumped unto a pile of stones on the further bank and started barking.
"I immediately noted that he had found something and I made my way to the bank and saw what he had found," said Constable Grime.
If the smell was so strong that a human couldn't miss it - it would be a miracle if a sniffer dog had. That is hardly an example which indicates the superlative skills of any sniffer dog.
-
If the smell was so strong that a human couldn't miss it - it would be a miracle if a sniffer dog had. That is hardly an example which indicates the superlative skills of any sniffer dog.
Eddie risked his life jumping in the river like the doggie version of Indiana Jones to locate the body. Maybe they'll do a movie version of his life one day - the super dog that busted the ones who thought they'd got away with it @)(++(*
-
Eddie risked his life jumping in the river like the doggie version of Indiana Jones to locate the body. Maybe they'll do a movie version of his life one day - the super dog that busted the ones who thought they'd got away with it @)(++(*
Sure. If you all continue living like some 'Eddie cult' they might even do it sooner @)(++(*
-
(http://sosmaddie.blogs.dhnet.be/media/00/01/0b049a9a6e4f95c5137976392526c8fb.jpg)
Dedicated - Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog Eddie (deceased)
-
Does everyone agree, that in the areas searched by Tito and Muzzy, there is certainly no body ?
-
Those dogs were very well paid for being excellent at their job. They didn't find live humans or dead pigs. They solved cases of missing people. You can't prove that the dogs were wrong and now they're looking for a body they believe the dogs were correct.
An alternative interpretation is that the recent searches have made it slightly less likely that the original dog alerts were meaningful.
The Met police do not "believe the dogs were correct". They believe that the original dogs may have been correct. You seem to have a problem understanding the difference between the Met Police stating that Madeleine may have died and your fixed idea that she did die.
The recent searches were a method of ruling out one of the potential locations for a body that the original dogs might have been alerting to.
Nothing about the recent searches in any way backs up the original dog alerts.
As I said, if anything, they have made them very slightly less likely to have been accurate.
-
You still don't get it. Grime could tell the dog's behaviour changed as soon as he went inside 5A and his behaviour changed when he passed the hire car.
-
You still don't get it. Grime could tell the dog's behaviour changed as soon as he went inside 5A and his behaviour changed when he passed the hire car.
So much that he had to be called back to the McCanns car over and over while apparently finding the wall more interesting.
So much that he played with the cuddle cat rather than alert to it and only alerted at the far end of the counter in the kitchen area when the toy was hidden by Grime in the cupboard.
Such scientifically imprecise work is so open to question that it is, as Grime himself tells us, only of evidential value when backed up by forensics.
Our opinions clearly differ.
-
If Eddie checks a piece of ground and does not signal, we know for certain nothing is there.
If Tito and Muzzy check a piece of ground, and do not signal, we know for certain nothing is there.
This information given by the dog, by not alerting, is extremely valuable, for it can rule out a piece of ground.
Another example is Carla's valuable work in a current ongoing UK case - checked two houses and gardens and a car. She did not alert. Very valuable, because it tells Yorkshire police : definitely there was never anything detectable in those houses gardens and car.
-
...You don't even know where they were 8-)(--) ...
But you know where those clothes were - in the living area - did you not read the label on the box?
-
But you know where those clothes were - in the living area - did you not read the label on the box?
They may have already been packed before Eddie went in? If they're in the living room then you can provide evidence of that fact? I'll await your screenshot.
-
If Eddie checks a piece of ground and does not signal, we know for certain nothing is there.
If Tito and Muzzy check a piece of ground, and do not signal, we know for certain nothing is there.
This information given by the dog, by not alerting, is extremely valuable, for it can rule out a piece of ground.
Another example is Carla's valuable work in a current ongoing UK case - checked two houses and gardens and a car. She did not alert. Very valuable, because it tells Yorkshire police : definitely there was never anything detectable in those houses gardens and car.
Not quite. A body could have been there, just not long enough to leave a scent detectable by the dog.
-
Not quite. A body could have been there, just not long enough to leave a scent detectable by the dog.
Good point. So, rephrasing -
Tito and Muzzy tell us that nothing with PMI of over 150 minutes was in the ground they searched without alerting.
Eddie tells us that nothing with PMI of over 150 minutes was in the ground he searched without alerting
(or possibly replace 150 with 85, source = CSST experiment)
-
And what time frame is that exactly ?
Minutes, hours, days ?
You tell us Alfie !
I don't know exactly, I do know however that it allegedly takes around 90 minutes from the point of death before enough scent or whatever it is is detectable by a dog. If a body lay in a house for 5 minutes 10 years ago will a dog still be able to detect it? Who knows?
-
And would atmospheric conditions affect the length of time do you think ?
I should think so, but really you should be asking an expert. There's one on this forum and also Mr Grime is going to answer all our questions about the dogs, one day soon apparently.
-
In what was was my statement a wind up? Even the person whose post I was addressing (Pegasus) conceded that I had made a good point, now stop making a fool of yourself.
I don't think there is anyway you will stop op making a fool of himself
-
The CSST experiment indicated a minimum required interval of 1 hour 25 minutes.
http://www.csst.org/cadaver_scent.html
-
The CSST experiment indicated a minimum required interval of 1 hour 25 minutes.
http://www.csst.org/cadaver_scent.html
Thank you. So this proves my statement "Not quite. A body could have been there, just not long enough to leave a scent detectable by the dog." is factually correct and not a wind-up. I don't suppose I will receive an apology from OP for the unmerited ad hominem attack, but that's par for the course.
-
Eddie alerted at the flower bed and a body didn't lay there for 1 hour 25 minutes. But if the cadaver was moved there from inside 5A after 90 minutes to the flower bed for only a short period - that made Eddie alert there IMO.
-
Eddie alerted at the flower bed and a body didn't lay there for 1 hour 25 minutes. But if the cadaver was moved there from inside 5A after 90 minutes to the flower bed for only a short period - that made Eddie alert there IMO.
Can anyone explain why, if Eddie alerted to the flower bed, it was never dug up?
-
Perhaps they could tell that the soil hadn't been disturbed without needing to dig - usually quite obvious when a flowerbed has been disturbed.
-
Eddie may have started digging if a body was there. Contaminated branches were probably what the dog alerted to. Branches were taken as evidence.
"FBI consultant Martin Grime told the High Court in Glasgow that he and his springer spaniel dogs, Eddie, Keela and Morse, were called in by Northern Constabulary in the hunt for Bob Rose, who disappeared on June 6 last year.
Mr Grime told prosecutor Alex Prentice QC that one of the dogs, Eddie, who is trained to detect dead bodies, reacted when he was taken to sand dunes at Sty Wick on June 24 last year.
He said: “His normal reaction is to bark. On this occasion he started to dig. As soon as he started to dig I called him back.”
The jury heard that a thin metal probe was then put into the spot Eddie indicated before a forensic anthropologist was called in to excavate the scene.
The jury was told that a body was found at the spot Eddie had indicated."
-
Eddie alerted at the flower bed and a body didn't lay there for 1 hour 25 minutes. But if the cadaver was moved there from inside 5A after 90 minutes to the flower bed for only a short period - that made Eddie alert there IMO.
If Madeleine had tried to climb up on the railings just outside the patio doors, slipped and fallen badly into the flowerbed below just after her parents left for the tapas that would have given enough time for the scent to develop in that location. The scent however may have been less pronounced as it was early in the process of decomposition.
-
Perhaps they could tell that the soil hadn't been disturbed without needing to dig - usually quite obvious when a flowerbed has been disturbed.
That's a pretty lame excuse in my opinion, just assuming that there was nothing buried there.
-
I was putting it forward as a possible reason, not an excuse. I don't do excuses. It is easy to tell if an area of ground has been recently disturbed
-
He said: “His normal reaction is to bark. On this occasion he started to dig. As soon as he started to dig I called him back.”
Is this similar to biting and throwing CC away because he thought it was a toy to play with so Grime hid it in the cupboard to do a second test on the toy.
-
I was putting it forward as a possible reason, not an excuse. I don't do excuses. It is easy to tell if an area of ground has been recently disturbed
It wasn' that recent. May to August. I can dig a hole in my flowerbed, put in a plant and fill in the hole and it looks like it was there all along. I'd have thought if a cadaver dog alerts outside at a place on the ground with easily diggable soil that the logical reaction if looking for the body of a small child would be to dig it up just to check. Call me crazy!
-
It wasn' that recent. May to August. I can dig a hole in my flowerbed, put in a plant and fill in the hole and it looks like it was there all along. I'd have thought if a cadaver dog alerts outside at a place on the ground with easily diggable soil that the logical reaction if looking for the body of a small child would be to dig it up just to check. Call me crazy!
OK, You're crazy ?{)(**
You are quite right, I was thinking it was the dogs that came the next day.
-
It wasn' that recent. May to August. I can dig a hole in my flowerbed, put in a plant and fill in the hole and it looks like it was there all along. I'd have thought if a cadaver dog alerts outside at a place on the ground with easily diggable soil that the logical reaction if looking for the body of a small child would be to dig it up just to check. Call me crazy!
no soil sample taken...perhaps grime knew that an alert outside after 3 months was a load of cobblers
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
no soil sample taken...perhaps grime knew that an alert outside after 3 months was a load of cobblers
@)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
Would you be interested in some examples of victims found as a direct result of a dog signalling outdoors more than three months after the crime? There are several. As far as I can see, absolutely none of them were shoe repairers.
-
If using dogs outdoors after 3 months is cobblers -
someone better phone SY quick and tell them.
I saw them on TV the other day using dogs outdoors after 84 months.
-
This question has probably been covered in the past, but can anyone tell me how many cadavers Eddie had positively indicated which were then located?
-
Would you be interested in some examples of victims found as a direct result of a dog signalling outdoors more than three months after the crime? There are several. As far as I can see, absolutely none of them were shoe repairers.
then why didn't grime take a sample...
you say victims found...so the body or parts are present...not residual scent...not the same
-
If using dogs outdoors after 3 months is cobblers -
someone better phone SY quick and tell them.
I saw them on TV the other day using dogs outdoors after 84 months.
again you don't understand...this whole debate is about residual scent...not about remains...remains can be found years later...residual scent does not last 3 months outside
-
again you don't understand...this whole debate is about residual scent...not about remains...remains can be found years later...residual scent does not last 3 months outside
'residual scent does not last 3 months outside'
I see you are keen on alchemy.
-
'residual scent does not last 3 months outside'
I see you are keen on alchemy.
it doesn't...pegaus is confusing recovery of remains and residual scent...I guarantee every example he has offered to post involve the detection of remains...residual scent does not last 3 months outside
-
it doesn't...pegaus is confusing recovery of remains and residual scent...I guarantee every example he has offered to post involve the detection of remains...residual scent does not last 3 months outside
Can you prove that ?
-
Eddie alerted to contaminated clothes so he was possibly alerting to contaminated branches/fibres on wall outside. Eddie doesn't alert for no reason. That probably means a cadaver was in contact so possibly not in a bag. It would be very interesting to hear Martin Grime's thoughts on the garden alerts.
"with the recovery of hair in the corridor [pathway] that exists in the area of the back garden next to the window of the couple's bedroom, with the recovery of several pieces of the branches of the climbing plant in the garden (for later check of possible blood traces on them) and with the recovery of possible fibres on the garden wall next to the climbing plant."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_EDDIE-KEELA.htm
-
If the welsh dogs had signalled a small area on the ground at that mound area, how would SY have used that intelligence? What would SY have done next?
-
Don't you find it odd that, considering Eddie alerts to dried blood from a living person, he did not find a single speck of blood in the whole of Murat's house and garden after 2 days of searching?
probably because the handler was not looking for dried blood..its all in the cuing...ask steve davies
-
Don't you find it odd that, considering Eddie alerts to dried blood from a living person, he did not find a single speck of blood in the whole of Murat's house and garden after 2 days of searching?
You could argue the same about 5B 5D 5H and 4G, and (minus the clothes) the Rua Das Flores villa.
Lots of pointing by the handler at all those properties, watch the footage, and the handler knew all those properties were of interest - yet ZERO alerts by by Eddie at those properties, again proving that pointing does not make the dog alert.
The above examples, and examples in other cases, like the zero alerts by black labrador Carla at two houses in England recently, indicate to me that cadaver dogs do not signal specks of dried blood from living people, but I am no expert.
-
You could argue the same about 5B 5D 5H and 4G, and (minus the clothes) the Rua Das Flores villa.
Lots of pointing by the handler at all those properties, watch the footage, and the handler knew all those properties were of interest - yet ZERO alerts by by Eddie at those properties, again proving that pointing does not make the dog alert.
The above examples, and examples in other cases, like the zero alerts by black labrador Carla at two houses in England recently, indicate to me that cadaver dogs do not signal specks of dried blood from living people, but I am no expert.
Well if they don't then why the need for a blood dog like Keela?
-
You've asked the question, do you have the answer ? Also are you trying to imply that Fr.Pacheco was in 'direct' contact with corpses ?
according to amaral there was a corpse in the church where they are kept overnight...priests have direct contact with corpses...extreme unction I believe
-
The dogs could be reacting to many things according to grime....
did the priest go in 5a......bodies are kept in portuguese churches for several days
From where do you get this info? Pre-funeral visitations used to take place in the house of the person deceased, now they take place in the funeral homes. The casket is taken out from the funeral home and brought to the church in the day of the funeral.
-
Your level of ignorance is truly entertaining, extreme unction is administered to the sick in their dying hours (STILL ALIVE), in certain circumstances i.e. sudden death, extreme unction is administered within a strict timeframe !
I haven't got a clue about stupid religious claptrap...you are quite correct...[ offensive comment removed ]...you are religious no doubt..as corpses are left in churches there is bound to be some cross contamination
-
I haven't got a clue about stupid religious claptrap...you are quite correct...[ offensive comment removed ]...you are religious no doubt..as corpses are left in churches there is bound to be some cross contamination
The corpses are left in churches, yes. But they lie in the caskets. Closed caskets. The priest has no reason to open it.
-
The corpses are left in churches, yes. But they lie in the caskets. Closed caskets. The priest has no reason to open it.
there would bound to be contamination on the outside of the casket
-
there would bound to be contamination on the outside of the casket
You think that the priests polish the casket lid with their robes, or throw themselves on it? By praying near the casket the priest wouldn't get contaminated.
-
Let us take your post on it's individual merits -
I haven't got a clue about stupid religious claptrap. Then why introduce it into the debate ?
religion is for idiots... I don't concur with your assertion !
You are religious no doubt. Nope, I'm agnostic !
As corpses are left in churches there is bound to be some cross contamination. No, you are so so wrong on this quote !
You are quite right. Yes, I am, thank you !
contamination is obvious
-
contamination is obvious
Even if the priest in question never set his foot inside of the 5A apartment?
-
From where do you get this info? Pre-funeral visitations used to take place in the house of the person deceased, now they take place in the funeral homes. The casket is taken out from the funeral home and brought to the church in the day of the funeral.
Interesting statement.
"The casket is taken out from the funeral home and brought to the church in the day of the funeral."
So when was it exactly that Madeleine's parents managed to retrieve her body from where ever, smuggle her into the church, unscrew the coffin lid, place madeleine inside, screw the lid back down and make their exit without anyone noticing? Job done.
On the day of the funeral as you claim, there was absolutely no chance of that.
As there was absolutely no chance that the smell of death emanating from a month old corpse would not have required an Eddie to notice it.
If the coffin had lain in the church over night ... in a town crawling with media and journalists who no doubt knew the parents visited the church ... how could it have been accomplished? Bearing in mind that the smell would be even more overpowering.
More interesting ... why is it only now that Dr Amaral is suggesting this as a theory? is it because the lines the new investigations are following quite obviously owe nothing to his original theory, so he felt the need to invent a new one?
-
Even if the priest in question never set his foot inside of the 5A apartment?
mccans were in the church..grime said there were several cross contamination scenarios...this could be one
-
mccans were in the church..grime said there were several cross contamination scenarios...this could be one
So how comes the second flat the McCanns resided in was not contaminated, in spite of the priest walking inside? An how the 5A apartment could have been contaminated by the McCanns, who got contaminated attending church, when they got transferred to 4H on 4th May and they weren't attending the church in Praia before Maddie went missing?
-
Interesting statement.
"The casket is taken out from the funeral home and brought to the church in the day of the funeral."
So when was it exactly that Madeleine's parents managed to retrieve her body from where ever, smuggle her into the church, unscrew the coffin lid, place madeleine inside, screw the lid back down and make their exit without anyone noticing? Job done.
On the day of the funeral as you claim, there was absolutely no chance of that.
As there was absolutely no chance that the smell of death emanating from a month old corpse would not have required an Eddie to notice it.
If the coffin had lain in the church over night ... in a town crawling with media and journalists who no doubt knew the parents visited the church ... how could it have been accomplished? Bearing in mind that the smell would be even more overpowering.
More interesting ... why is it only now that Dr Amaral is suggesting this as a theory? is it because the lines the new investigations are following quite obviously owe nothing to his original theory, so he felt the need to invent a new one?
I think the scenario would be coffin is brought to the church on SAT 2 JUNE for people to pay their respects at the church.
Somebody with a key could enter the church at 4am on SUN 3 JUNE without anybody knowing about it.
Funeral/Cremation takes place later that same day.
-
mccans were in the church..grime said there were several cross contamination scenarios...this could be one
There had been so many occupants of the apartment after the McCann family moved out that it could never have been determined categorically that any alert was as a direct result of their occupancy.
It was proved scientifically that blood traces had nothing to do with them.
As was proved in the Shannon Mathews case when the dogs alerted in homes where furniture had been contaminated, any of the occupants after the McCann family could have had a bag or a jumper similarly contaminated.
Mr Grime was well aware of these possibilities, but not even his professional opinion is taken on board by some.
-
There had been so many occupants of the apartment after the McCann family moved out that it could never have been determined categorically that any alert was as a direct result of their occupancy.
It was proved scientifically that blood traces had nothing to do with them.
As was proved in the Shannon Mathews case when the dogs alerted in homes where furniture had been contaminated, any of the occupants after the McCann family could have had a bag or a jumper similarly contaminated.
Mr Grime was well aware of these possibilities, but not even his professional opinion is taken on board by some.
And contaminated a kids t-shirt, mothers pants and top but no other clothes that were tested.
-
Well if they don't then why the need for a blood dog like Keela?
My amateur opinion:
Keela indicates where blood (human) is.
Eddie signals where a body (human) is, or has been.
(Yes I know that differs a bit from what the handler has said)
BTW Keela certainly does signal blood from live humans as illustrate by the valuable work she did in a stabbing case in the UK.
-
My amateur opinion:
Keela indicates where blood (human) is.
Eddie signals where a body (human) is, or has been.
(Yes I know that differs a bit from what the handler has said)
BTW Keela certainly does signal blood from live humans as illustrate by the valuable work she did in a stabbing case in the UK.
My understanding is that they use Keela to verify what Eddie is alerting to (or not alerting to) ie: if she alerts where he has alerted then it's blood, if she doesn't then it's cadaver. So, thtat doesn't solve the mystery of why Eddie did not alert to blood traces anywhere except on property belonging to the McCanns and in places they had stayed.
-
I think the scenario would be coffin is brought to the church on SAT 2 JUNE for people to pay their respects at the church.
Somebody with a key could enter the church at 4am on SUN 3 JUNE without anybody knowing about it.
Funeral/Cremation takes place later that same day.
I have never known of a coffin lying in a church for that length of time.
I have never known of a funeral taking place on a Sunday.
Also, this was a church shared by two denominations each holding services on Sundays, so I doubt if a coffin would be in the church on a Sunday.
We have Martina's statement that coffins remain in the funeral home in Portugal and are moved to the church on the day of the funeral.
-
And contaminated a kids t-shirt, mothers pants and top but no other clothes that were tested.
I am afraid we must give some thought as to exactly how these items became contaminated.
-
Montclair posted this:
In Portugal the coffins with the deceased are kept in the church or the misericórdia for at least a day before the funeral so that people can pay their respects and sign the condolences book. The coffins are then taken directly from the church in the hearse to the cemetary with mourners following or to the cremation site. I have been to enough funerals here to know how it works.
http://crematorium.eu/26_questtions_about_cremation.html:
Is the coffin cremated with the body?
The container and the body shall be placed in cremator and cremation commenced. The coffin or container with the body inside shall not be opened or otherwise disturbed, other than in exceptional circumstances, and then only with the express permission and in the presence of the Applicant for Cremation (usually the executor or next of kin).
-
I am afraid we must give some thought as to exactly how these items became contaminated.
It is obvious.
-
I am afraid we must give some thought as to exactly how these items became contaminated.
And also just exactly what we can (and can't) infer from Eddie picking things up in his mouth.
-
This existing-coffin idea is a complicated method and unrealistic IMO.
Look at the recent existing-grave concealment case in the UK. Stupidly risky.
-
This existing-coffin idea is a complicated method and unrealistic IMO.
Look at the recent existing-grave concealment case in the UK. Stupidly risky.
I agree it's very risky but an effective way to get rid of any body evidence.
Can you find out if any funerals took place 2/3 June?
-
I agree it's very risky but an effective way to get rid of any body evidence.
Can you find out if any funerals took place 2/3 June?
I could try but I think this funeral is irrelevant.
If I did I would look for the church calendar of events of that week.
BTW it's fairly easy to guess nationality.
-
I agree it's very risky but an effective way to get rid of any body evidence.
Can you find out if any funerals took place 2/3 June?
And whilst you're at it check to see if any dogs died thst weekend and were taken to the pet crematorium.
-
And whilst you're at it check to see if any dogs died thst weekend and were taken to the pet crematorium.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/HOOS_HENDRIK.htm
-
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/HOOS_HENDRIK.htm
Terribly remiss of the PJ to check with the local Pet Crem guy but not to check all the coffins left in the church that summer.
-
there would bound to be contamination on the outside of the casket
Why would the body touch the outside of the casket?
-
I agree it's very risky but ...
There was a case in Oxfordshire where a man was seen carrying, then later seen near a church.
But in the PDL case I think you are at the wrong location, only a low intelligence perp would choose such a stupid plan.
-
Why would the body touch the outside of the casket?
Doesn't have to...the people who put the body in the casket touch the lid and the outside of the casket...grime says contamination is immediate
grime talks about the alerts being the result of contamination...this is one possibility
-
Doesn't have to...the people who put the body in the casket touch the lid and the outside of the casket...grime says contamination is immediate
grime talks about the alerts being the result of contamination...this is one possibility
How? None of the priests went into 5A. Do you know when the McCanns moved out?
-
How? None of the priests went into 5A. Do you know when the McCanns moved out?
grime mentions cross contamination as a reason for the alerts..it cant be ignored
-
grime mentions cross contamination as a reason for the alerts..it cant be ignored
Neither can be the distinct possibility the dogs got it right in the apartment, and of course they didn't signal in any other one.
-
grime mentions cross contamination as a reason for the alerts..it cant be ignored
What are you going on about? They hadn't been in the church until after they'd moved out of 5A.
-
Neither can be the distinct possibility the dogs got it right in the apartment, and of course they didn't signal in any other one.
The dogs no not confirm the death of maddie..that is an absolute fact
-
The dogs no not confirm the death of maddie..that is an absolute fact
They don't dismiss it either.
.........and I know what I would lay a bet on.
-
They don't dismiss it either.
.........and I know what I would lay a bet on.
of course they don't..maddie may still be alive
-
Doesn't have to...the people who put the body in the casket touch the lid and the outside of the casket...grime says contamination is immediate
grime talks about the alerts being the result of contamination...this is one possibility
No, the body is put in the coffin and the lid put on later. Hygiene is very important in the business and gloves and disinfectant liquids is the order of the day.
-
You've asked the question, do you have the answer ? Also are you trying to imply that Fr.Pacheco was in 'direct' contact with corpses ?
Wasn't that one of the different culture misunderstandings which worked against the McCanns i.e. the Portuguese only ask for a priest if a death has occurred?
-
Eddie was deliberately led to RM's house and garden, directed 100s of times by handler over two days, zero alerts.
-
Which proves conclusively that the dogs could not be cued !
Have you seen the evidence of that on the DVD then, because I haven't.
-
Have you seen the evidence of that on the DVD then, because I haven't.
Evidence not on the DVD:
1. video footage of Eddie in 5B
2. video footage of Eddie in 5D
3. video footage of Eddie in 5H
4. video footage of Eddie in 4G
In all four examples:
(A) The dog has been deliberately led there
(B) The handler knows it is an apartment of interest
(C) The handler repeatedly points out to the dog where to sniff
(D) The handler sometimes calls the dog back to certain areas
Total alerts by Eddie in those 4 apartments = 0, IRMC
-
Which proves conclusively that the dogs could not be cued !
No it doesn't, it proves nothing.
-
My opinion is that the dogs were cued...and it was the correct thing to do
-
Evidence of what specifically ?
Quote from: pegasus on June 18, 2014, 07:39:54 PM
Eddie was deliberately led to RM's house and garden, directed 100s of times by handler over two days, zero alerts.
I think Misty was referring to the above quote from Pegasus.
We are familiar with Eddie in Apartment 5A - in the sports centre - in the flat with CC - and in the garage.
I have never seen a video of Eddie in the Murat residence or garden.
I don't think Misty has either.
Have you? Has Pegasus? Has anyone?
If it exists may we be provided with a link.
-
Cued to do what exactly?
brought back to what grime thought were important sites to check again and again
-
brought back to what grime thought were important sites to check again and again
In your view, and you are no dog handler.
-
I do believe the dogs did the job they were asked to do: find traces of cadaver scent or blood.
Unfortunately, there was no overwhelming evidence that the blood belonged to little Maddie.
But kate did offer an explanation-when she thought it may be over whelming evidence by saying Maddie has a nose bleed? ( I am not sure where I read that, sorry I can't offer a direct quote, and apologies if I have picked that up wrong)
The cadaver on kate's clothes and her explanation is quite something. Also, finding cadaver scent in a cupboard? if someone had died in that bedroom-say an elderly person a few weeks previously then, that would be an acceptable reason for alerting cadaver scent by the dog-but in a cupboard? Hm
-
... kate did offer an explanation-when she thought it may be over whelming evidence by saying Maddie has a nose bleed? ( I am not sure where I read that, sorry I can't offer a direct quote, and apologies if I have picked that up wrong)
I don't recall it being KM who said that - maybe you are thinking of someone else?
-
I do believe the dogs did the job they were asked to do: find traces of cadaver scent or blood.
Unfortunately, there was no overwhelming evidence that the blood belonged to little Maddie.
But kate did offer an explanation-when she thought it may be over whelming evidence by saying Maddie has a nose bleed? ( I am not sure where I read that, sorry I can't offer a direct quote, and apologies if I have picked that up wrong)
The cadaver on kate's clothes and her explanation is quite something. Also, finding cadaver scent in a cupboard? if someone had died in that bedroom-say an elderly person a few weeks previously then, that would be an acceptable reason for alerting cadaver scent by the dog-but in a cupboard? Hm
Oh please. Cannot you see that you are repeating the internet myths.
I advise you first to read Madeleine's files and then to make comments.
Otherwise you are repeating hearsay comments of whoever made these up on internet.
-
I don't recall it being KM who said that - maybe you are thinking of someone else?
Gerald himself, in his arguido statement:
The lawyer for the defence says he wishes the arguido to be asked again if Madeleine bled. To which he said it was common for Madeleine to have nosebleeds.
-
The lawyer for the defence says he wishes the arguido to be asked again if Madeleine bled. To which he said it was common for Madeleine to have nosebleeds.
It's not the first case in which the nosebleed argument has been used.
-
It's not the first case in which the nosebleed argument has been used.
There are accounts in the files of a child suffering a cut chin and a man who bled profusely ... both resident in 5A.
I think the important thing is that no blood was found that matched Madeleine.
-
I think the important thing is that no blood was found that matched Madeleine.
Exactly.
And also no CADAVER scent of Madeleine.
-
There are accounts in the files of a child suffering a cut chin and a man who bled profusely ... both resident in 5A.
I think the important thing is that no blood was found that matched Madeleine.
The man who 'bled profusely' was the fellow who nicked himself shaving I presume ... who is is this 'bleeding child' you refer to though ?
-
There are accounts in the files of a child suffering a cut chin and a man who bled profusely ... both resident in 5A.
I think the important thing is that no blood was found that matched Madeleine.
A child with the cut chin - statement of Claire Louise Fawkes:
On the Wednesday or Thursday of the second week of our holiday I received a phone call from a MW employee saying that R*** had fallen in the crêche and had cut her chin. When I arrived at the club she had almost stopped bleeding, but even so and through precaution we took her to a doctor in P da L, who put in some stitches. I do not remember if she bled again after this or whether she did in the apartment, but it is a possibility.
She couldn't bleed much from a stitched wound.
There is no trace of a man bleeding profusely in any of the former 5A occupants statements, so I will be glad if you provide a link to or an excerpt from the statement mentioning this incident.
-
The man who 'bled profusely' was the fellow who nicked himself shaving I presume ... who is is this 'bleeding child' you refer to though ?
Cartas Rogatorias Vol V
Pages 47 – 48
Leicestershire Police Force
Witness Statement
Simon Andrew Fawkes
Occupation: Computer technician
Date: 22nd April 2008
- SNIP - The holiday was quite pleasant in spite of the fact that R*** suffered a cut to the chin at the crèche, the holidays passed peacefully.
Apart from R**** having fallen whilst under the care of MW nothing was stolen or missing from the apartment, nobody died in the apartment during our stay.
-
The only DNA matching found in 5A ( and this is connected to blood samples) are of the PJ officers and Gerry McCann
-
A child with the cut chin - statement of Claire Louise Fawkes:
On the Wednesday or Thursday of the second week of our holiday I received a phone call from a MW employee saying that R*** had fallen in the crêche and had cut her chin. When I arrived at the club she had almost stopped bleeding, but even so and through precaution we took her to a doctor in P da L, who put in some stitches. I do not remember if she bled again after this or whether she did in the apartment, but it is a possibility.
She couldn't bleed much from a stitched wound.
There is no trace of a man bleeding profusely in any of the former 5A occupants statements, so I will be glad if you provide a link to or an excerpt from the statement mentioning this incident.
Cartas Rogatorias Vol V
Pages 44 - 46
Witness statement
FAWKES; Claire Louise
Occupation: Teacher
Date: 22 nd April 2008
- SNIP - I do not remember if she bled again after this or whether she did in the apartment, but it is a possibility.
Cartas Rogatorias Vol V
Pages 33-35
Statement of Saleigh Gordon.
Occupation: Air Hostess
4 pages
Date: 24th April de 2008
- SNIP - During our stay Paul cut his face whilst shaving and the cut bled for some time.
Considering the number of times the apartment was allowed to be occupied after the McCann family's departure who knows how many people had bled or there ... the really important thing you do not want to take on board is that there was no blood from Madeleine McCann.
-
The only DNA matching found in 5A ( and this is connected to blood samples) are of the PJ officers and Gerry McCann
But it's not like the rest of the DNA were the full profiles, not matching with any of the McCanns. Most of the DNA was too weak to be matched with anything.
-
Hi Icabod, is there any info regarding how long this individual bled for and quantities of blood expelled ?
Was he checked for vitamin C deficiency one wonders ?
Edited to add-
Can anyone provide a name for this 'bleeding man' ?
Paul Gordon
I am very surprised posters don't know about his shaving accident ... fortunately there is no record of him requiring stitches or transfusions ... but he did bleed.
-
But it's not like the rest of the DNA were the full profiles, not matching with any of the McCanns. Most of the DNA was too weak to be matched with anything.
But the matching ones? Were they of dead people? Bleeding people?
-
But the matching ones? Were they of dead people? Bleeding people?
They were very much alive. That, though, does not exclude the possibility that the donor of the unidentified DNA might be dead or bleeding.
-
They were very much alive. That, though, does not exclude the possibility that the donor of the unidentified DNA might be dead or bleeding.
Well Mr Gordon seems to have left quite a bit to be going on with
Leicestershire Police Force
Witness Account
Statement by Paul Anthony Gordon
Occupation: Accountant
Date : 24th April 2008
CARTAS ROGATORIAS (FILE 5)
Pages 36 to 38
Witness statement of Paul Anthony Gordon (former holiday maker in Apartment 5A) 2008.04.24
- SNIP - however there was one occasion when I cut myself shaving in the bathroom of the apartment. I would say that the cut bled for about 4 5 minutes and that it took some time until the cut stopped bleeding, during which period I walked around the apartment with paper tissues trying to stop the blood.
-
Hi Icabod, is there any info regarding how long this individual bled for and quantities of blood expelled ?
Was he checked for vitamin C deficiency one wonders ?
Edited to add-
Can anyone provide a name for this 'bleeding man' ?
I don't know the details Pat but this fellow who, I presume, was some kind of Clint Eastwood character who used an old style cut throat razor to shave ( you don't bleed 'profusely' from a nic using a Gilette fushion razor afterall ) apparently moved the sofa away from the window and stood there 'bleeding profusely' onto the floor
... didn't stand at the sink or stick a bit of toilet paper on the nic to stem the 'profuse' bleeding ... just walked around the apartment moving furniture and bleeding on the floor
-
IIRC there was once a murder case in America where the defence was asked to explain victim's blood on accused, and accused's blood on victim. The defence replied that the accused had a nosebleed and also the victim had a nosebleed.
-
There were all the other statements Anne found a while back of all these other people (aside from Paul Gordon) who did, or might have, bled in apartment 5a.
Quite amazing ...
-
Cartas Rogatorias Vol V
Pages 44 - 46
Witness statement
FAWKES; Claire Louise
Occupation: Teacher
Date: 22 nd April 2008
- SNIP - I do not remember if she bled again after this or whether she did in the apartment, but it is a possibility.
Cartas Rogatorias Vol V
Pages 33-35
Statement of Saleigh Gordon.
Occupation: Air Hostess
4 pages
Date: 24th April de 2008
- SNIP - During our stay Paul cut his face whilst shaving and the cut bled for some time.
Considering the number of times the apartment was allowed to be occupied after the McCann family's departure who knows how many people had bled or there ... the really important thing you do not want to take on board is that there was no blood from Madeleine McCann.
And yes, just tracking back up the thread, there it is again ...
-
I don't know the details Pat but this fellow who, I presume, was some kind of Clint Eastwood character who used an old style cut throat razor to shave ( you don't bleed 'profusely' from a nic using a Gilette fushion razor afterall ) apparently moved the sofa away from the window and stood there 'bleeding profusely' onto the floor
... didn't stand at the sink or stick a bit of toilet paper on the nic to stem the 'profuse' bleeding ... just walked around the apartment moving furniture and bleeding on the floor
@)(++(* And spot on 8((()*/
-
In a 2005 case in Surrey, Keela discovered eight pieces of blood-stained clothing.
Does any anti-dog person here claim they were the results of shaving cuts?
No. The anti-dog peeps accept the validity of Keela's sterling work on all the other cases, and bring up shaving cuts exclusively in this one case in Portugal.
-
The dog didn't pick up the profusely bleeding male's chin blood anywhere else- apart from behind the sofa.
We either have to accept that the dogs picked up scent where it was in relation to the exercise OR dismiss them out of hand.
a( If agree the dogs did pick up scent then we should agree that the places where the profusely bleeding man, bled; would be highlighted by the dog.
b) If we disagree, why bother to mention the bleeding man at all, as we don't believe the dog did pick up any scent.
Finding Maddie's blood would have to be further investigated as to why it was there, in the particular place. If she had a nose bleed-would there not be traces in other places? There could be an innocent explanation-or not.
Having a suspicion needs to be moved on to proof of a scenario.
With regards to the cadaver... a dog cannot smell any individual persons death. The dog will highlight a dead person was here, It cannot distinguish if the dead person was male, female, child or adult.
-
The dog didn't pick up the profusely bleeding male's chin blood anywhere else- apart from behind the sofa.
We either have to accept that the dogs picked up scent where it was in relation to the exercise OR dismiss them out of hand.
a( If agree the dogs did pick up scent then we should agree that the places where the profusely bleeding man, bled; would be highlighted by the dog.
b) If we disagree, why bother to mention the bleeding man at all, as we don't believe the dog did pick up any scent.
Finding Maddie's blood would have to be further investigated as to why it was there, in the particular place. If she had a nose bleed-would there not be traces in other places? There could be an innocent explanation-or not.
Having a suspicion needs to be moved on to proof of a scenario.
With regards to the cadaver... a dog cannot smell any individual persons death. The dog will highlight a dead person was here, It cannot distinguish if the dead person was male, female, child or adult.
Not true...the alert does not signify the previous presence of a dead person...grime tells us this
-
As I said IIRC there was once a case where a defendant claimed that both he, and the victim, had nosebleeds.
And IIRC there was once another case where reportedly there had been a nosebleed from both sides.
-
Not true...the alert does not signify the previous presence of a dead person...grime tells us this
When does he say it didn't ?
-
When does he say it didn't ?
read his report
-
search for Cadaver dog. My understanding is they detect cadaver- a scent.
They didn't bring in the dogs to 'find a body' because the place had already been searched!
" With the use of a cadaver dog, rescue crews can identify dead bodies in wreckage for future removal, and cadaver dogs can also be used by crime units to find areas where a cadaver might have been buried, stored, or dismembered"
Myself and everyone else may be wrong ...but I don't think so.
-
search for Cadaver dog. My understanding is they detect cadaver- a scent.
They didn't bring in the dogs to 'find a body' because the place had already been searched!
" With the use of a cadaver dog, rescue crews can identify dead bodies in wreckage for future removal, and cadaver dogs can also be used by crime units to find areas where a cadaver might have been buried, stored, or dismembered"
Myself and everyone else may be wrong ...but I don't think so.
The dogs alert show a spot where a body MIGHT have been present...not where a body WAS present...if you think otherwise you are wrong
-
read his report
I did some time ago.
-
The dogs alert show a spot where a body MIGHT have been present...not where a body WAS present...
Correct.
Let's imagine that there had been on May 3rd some non-cadaver but specific scent source on the first shelf above the floor in the wardrobe, let's say hypothetically a bottle of perfume with some trace of a pig-derived ingredient and a slightly imperfect seal on the bottle's top, which Eddie mistook for cadaver scent.
Can you see that one would then actually expect the same specific non-cadaver scent to be on a few of the items of clothing which spent that whole evening, not being worn, but stored on that shelf?
So there for free I gave you a complete legal disproof of the ridiculously illogical "clothing indicates involvement" notion.
-
Pigs in cupboard...Hmmm
Yes! that is probably what the dog picked up.
pesky pigs get everywhere. well, not everywhere, I mean how did the pigs get into the apartment cupboard?
and who the hell killed the pig?...Is someone telling 'porkies'? oh sorry I'm couldn't help myself!
The point I was making was, the dogs picked up a scent it was accepted it was cadaver.. there was further investigations to follow...i.e a picture of what may have happened. Normal police work.
I never claimed that the scent was evidence that Maddie was dead and was placed in a cupboard at some point-however, others do believe it... and I respect, not agree, with their opinion.
-
I did some time ago.
you obviously didnt understand it
-
Pigs in cupboard...Hmmm
Yes! that is probably what the dog picked up.
pesky pigs get everywhere. well, not everywhere, I mean how did the pigs get into the apartment cupboard?
and who the hell killed the pig?...Is someone telling 'porkies'? oh sorry I'm couldn't help myself!
The point I was making was, the dogs picked up a scent it was accepted it was cadaver.. there was further investigations to follow...i.e a picture of what may have happened. Normal police work.
I never claimed that the scent was evidence that Maddie was dead and was placed in a cupboard at some point-however, others do believe it... and I respect, not agree, with their opinion.
Even accepting it was cadaverscent, there is no way the dog could say how long the source had been there - which according to Grime could be decades. Or whether it was there because of cross-contamination from an innocent source - either from other people - or objects as in the Shannon Matthew's case for instance. Or whether the source was above or beneath the ground. Or whether the source was even at the the place where the dog barked - because the odour drifts - and so for instance Eddie could have been alerting to the bed next to the wardrobe - amongst other places - for all anyone knows.
Eddie and Keela also alerted to blood from living people.
It is for these reasons that Grime repeatedy states that unless evidence can be found to corroborate the alerts - then they are useless from an evidential point of view.
IMO the very people who should have been aware of these facts about the dogs was Amaral and his team, but they simply decided that because Eddie and Keela alerted - Madeliene had died in 5A. Why was that? IMO either a case of (1) lazy policework, (they didn't bother to find out the facts) or (2) sheer ignorance (they didn't understand the facts)- or (3) a case of cherry picking only the facts which fitted best into a certain agenda. I go for No. 3.
-
Only three clothes out of the all the ones tested were cadaver contaminated. No blood on clothes. One kid, two mother. Explain Benice?
-
Only three clothes out of the all the ones tested were cadaver contaminated. No blood on clothes. One kid, two mother. Explain Benice?
most simple explanation is they were not contaminated ...false alert
-
most simple explanation is they were not contaminated ...false alert
Eddie had no record of false alerts so try again. He found missing people bodies and alerted to cadaver scent with no body (later found) re Adrian Prout case.
-
Even accepting it was cadaverscent, there is no way the dog could say how long the source had been there - which according to Grime could be decades. Or whether it was there because of cross-contamination from an innocent source - either from other people - or objects as in the Shannon Matthew's case for instance. Or whether the source was above or beneath the ground. Or whether the source was even at the the place where the dog barked - because the odour drifts - and so for instance Eddie could have been alerting to the bed next to the wardrobe - amongst other places - for all anyone knows.
Eddie and Keela also alerted to blood from living people.
It is for these reasons that Grime repeatedy states that unless evidence can be found to corroborate the alerts - then they are useless from an evidential point of view.
IMO the very people who should have been aware of these facts about the dogs was Amaral and his team, but they simply decided that because Eddie and Keela alerted - Madeliene had died in 5A. Why was that? IMO either a case of (1) lazy policework, (they didn't bother to find out the facts) or (2) sheer ignorance (they didn't understand the facts)- or (3) a case of cherry picking only the facts which fitted best into a certain agenda. I go for No. 3.
The alerts only occurred in one apartment.
-
Eddie had no record of false alerts so try again. He found missing people bodies and evidence of cadaver scent with no body (later found) re Adrian Prout case.
the no history of false alerts is a myth
-
the no history of false alerts is a myth
So give us an example of the false alert by Eddie.
-
Eddie had no record of false alerts so try again. He found missing people bodies and alerted to cadaver scent with no body (later found) re Adrian Prout case.
so when he alerted in Jersey to a tissue used (according to his handler) for cleaning up after sex, that was an alert to the presence of a dead body was it?
-
so when he alerted in Jersey to a tissue used (according to his handler) for cleaning up after sex, that was an alert to the presence of a dead body was it?
Link please?
-
Link please?
Are you seriously disputing what I have written?
-
the no history of false alerts is a myth
No it isn't. There's evidence of a child matching the description of the missing child in a deep sleep being carried away. This wanted man is the prime suspect. Any investigator would presume this was the missing child not in a deep sleep but deceased due to the cadaver findings. That's why they are now searching for a body in PDL. Therefore the contaminated clothes could connect to the missing child's death.
-
Are you seriously disputing what I have written?
No, I am just asking you to provide a link to an article in which such an alert is described.
-
No, I am just asking you to provide a link to an article in which such an alert is described.
"The EVRD was deployed in a wide area screening sweep of the site. The following alert indications were forthcoming:
VT / 9 Trench and gun emplacement containing small personnel shelter. Forensic examination revealed recently deposited tissues that appeared to have been used to ‘clean up following sexual intercourse’. It would appear that the shelter had been used as a venue for courting couples. This alert is within the trained parameters of the dog’s repertoire and is a satisfactory explanation of the alert".
http://voiceforprotest.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/operation-rectangle-summary-report.html
So, if this wasn't a false alert, then what was it?
-
"The EVRD was deployed in a wide area screening sweep of the site. The following alert indications were forthcoming:
VT / 9 Trench and gun emplacement containing small personnel shelter. Forensic examination revealed recently deposited tissues that appeared to have been used to ‘clean up following sexual intercourse’. It would appear that the shelter had been used as a venue for courting couples. This alert is within the trained parameters of the dog’s repertoire and is a satisfactory explanation of the alert".
http://voiceforprotest.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/operation-rectangle-summary-report.html
So, if this wasn't a false alert, then what was it?
There was the decomposing human tissue (semen) on the wipes and Eddie alerted to it. Where do you see a false alert here?
-
No it isn't. There's evidence of a child matching the description of the missing child in a deep sleep being carried away. This wanted man is the prime suspect. Any investigator would presume this was the missing child not in a deep sleep but deceased due to the cadaver findings. That's why they are now searching for a body in PDL. Therefore the contaminated clothes could connect to the missing child's death.
you are so mistaken...the idea that eddei has never falsely alerted is a myth
-
So give us an example of the false alert by Eddie.
- SNIP - A false alert is when a cadaver dog communicates to its handler that decomposing human remains are in a location where in fact there are no decomposing remains (2).
http://asociacionmagna.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Cadaver-Dog-and-Handler-Team-Capabilities-in-the-Recovery-of-Buried-Human-Remains-in-the-Southeastern-United-States4.pdf
So by definition all the alerts made by Eddie in Praia Da Luz were 'false alerts'.
-
you are so mistaken...the idea that eddei has never falsely alerted is a myth
Are you an expert in Forensic Science as well ?
Who by the way is eddei ?
-
There was the decomposing human tissue (semen) on the wipes and Eddie alerted to it. Where do you see a false alert here?
So Eddie alerts sometimes when there is no body present, nor has ever been present, is that what you're saying?
-
Only three clothes out of the all the ones tested were cadaver contaminated. No blood on clothes. One kid, two mother. Explain Benice?
Having watched the video I am still at a loss to understand how certain items were deemed to have been alerted to and others were not.
It could be a case of cross-contamination. Don't you find it at all suspicious that only clothes which had been packed in the one box were alerted to? All that clothing and by sheer coincidence the contaminated items just happened to have been packed into the same box. The odds of that happening by chance must be huge!
Don't you also find it a teeny bit suspicious that it was the mother's clothes and a top which IIRC the PJ claimed belonged to Madeleine which just happened to be contaminated? How convenient was that?
-
You can't cover up the truth like they do in Jersey 8)--))
-
Having watched the video I am still at a loss to understand how certain items were deemed to have been alerted to and others were not.
It could be a case of cross-contamination. Don't you find it at all suspicious that only clothes which had been packed in the one box were alerted to? All that clothing and by sheer coincidence the contaminated items just happened to have been packed into the same box. The odds of that happening by chance must be huge!
Don't you also find it a teeny bit suspicious that it was the mother's clothes and a top which IIRC the PJ claimed belonged to Madeleine which just happened to be contaminated? How convenient was that?
What precisely is your expertise in forensics ?
-
Having watched the video I am still at a loss to understand how certain items were deemed to have been alerted to and others were not.
It could be a case of cross-contamination. Don't you find it at all suspicious that only clothes which had been packed in the one box were alerted to? All that clothing and by sheer coincidence the contaminated items just happened to have been packed into the same box. The odds of that happening by chance must be huge!
Don't you also find it a teeny bit suspicious that it was the mother's clothes and a top which IIRC the PJ claimed belonged to Madeleine which just happened to be contaminated? How convenient was that?
Eddie didn't know whose clothes they were he barks on top of the clothes to alert.
(https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/349x190q90/46/lar4.jpg)
-
So Eddie alerts sometimes when there is no body present, nor has ever been present, is that what you're saying?
Ah, matina, you're back. Care to reply to this question?
-
...In the first clip the dog knocked over a basket and what looked like cuddle cat fell out-no barking ...
Precisely. He finds the cat. And no barking.
Eddie is saying clearly, there is no cadaver scent on the cat.
So then it a simple matter of watching the signal near the sideboard, knowing already that it is not the cat which is being signalled.
-
I disagree because dogs like to play with toys or tennis balls. Eddie marked CC but didn't bark like in another case in which he started to dig instead. A body was found underneath where he was digging. Grime had to do a second test by hiding CC to see.
-
I disagree because dogs like to play with toys or tennis balls. Eddie marked CC but didn't bark like in another case in which he started to dig instead. A body was found underneath where he was digging. Grime had to do a second test by hiding CC to see.
He does not signal when he sniffs base of sideboard door.
That says clearly to me: there is absolutely nothing inside the sideboard with the relevant odour on it.
It's exactly like the bark near wardrobe, which I think we agree on, last place sniffed ...?
-
Thanks for that clip Mod.
I don't think the dogs alerts would stand up as evidence in court.
In the first clip the dog knocked over a basket and what looked like cuddle cat fell out-no barking-later on the dog barked in what looks like a kitchen cupboard and cuddle cat was brought out.
I don't know what to make of it. How to interpret it. The dog certainly picked up a scent!
Could I just remind people that it was the UK police who suspected the family were not being quite helpful with regards to helping with the investigation-they suggested the dogs.
Eddie passed by CC three or four times and did not show any interest at all. I cannot think of any other interpretation except that no cadaverscent was present on Cuddlecat. What other interpretation can possibly be made?
-
He does not signal when he sniffs base of sideboard door.
That says clearly to me: there is absolutely nothing inside the sideboard with the relevant odour on it.
It's exactly like the bark near wardrobe, which I think we agree on, last place sniffed ...?
Eddie went in there the first time and didn't alert. The second time he did. Do you know what was the only difference? CC was there hidden in the cupboard the second time.
-
Eddie passed by CC three or four times and did not show any interest at all. I cannot think of any other interpretation except that no cadaverscent was present on Cuddlecat. What other interpretation can possibly be made?
I agree, an absolutely common-sense filled post.
-
Eddie went in there the first time and didn't alert. The second time he did. Do you know what was the only difference? CC was there hidden in the cupboard the second time.
IIRC he sniffs at the base of the sideboard door while the cat is in there and does not signal, but I would need to watch it again to confirm.
-
Eddie went in there the first time and didn't alert. The second time he did. Do you know what was the only difference? CC was there hidden in the cupboard the second time.
But what does that prove Pathfinder? Eddie either recognises a scent he has been trained to alert to and barks or if there is no scent which he recognises he doesn't bark. He didn't bark even though his nose passed closely by CC several times before it was taken away. Why do you think that happened?
-
I've explained that he marked CC by taking it out of the bin. A second test was done and he alerted.
-
I've explained that he marked CC by taking it out of the bin. A second test was done and he alerted.
He signals a fraction of a second after sniffing the exact correct location/object.
-
I've explained that he marked CC by taking it out of the bin. A second test was done and he alerted.
Sorry but that is simply not true. The only response Eddie was trained to make on recognising a certain scent was to bark. Just as the only response Keela was trained to do - was to freeze. There are no other alternatives according to Martin Grime.
-
I've explained he didn't bark but dug on another occasion and found a body.
-
I know what you are saying Pathfinder. I understand, and accept what you say.
On this occasion the dog just didn't find a body; and the scent he did find, could not be contributed to any specific person-that is my reason for thinking it wouldn't be admissible as evidence-circumstantial along with physical yes , certainly.
Also, it could as has happened, opened up an other line of inquiry.
*slip off topic for two seconds*
I love the wee dogs they are fantastic- some are now being trained to smell cancer and other illnesses in hospitals and clinics.
-
I know what you are saying Pathfinder. I understand, and accept what you say.
On this occasion the dog just didn't find a body; and the scent he did find, could not be contributed to any specific person-that is my reason for thinking it wouldn't be admissible as evidence-circumstantial along with physical yes , certainly.
Also, it could as has happened, opened up an other line of inquiry.
*slip off topic for two seconds*
I love the wee dogs they are fantastic- some are now being trained to smell cancer and other illnesses in hospitals and clinics.
that's what grime said seven years ago......not really on the ball are you
-
that's what grime said seven years ago......not really on the ball are you
Yes, it is only circumstantial that only one person was missing.
-
"quote" Yes, it is only circumstantial that only one person was missing."unquote"
Ooops I didn't mean for it to read like that. I was meaning; it is only circumstantial evidence that the scent was Maddies and she died in the apartment. That is why it is still a Thesis, and the case was shelved.
Plenty of evidence she is missing:)
-
"quote" Yes, it is only circumstantial that only one person was missing."unquote"
Ooops I didn't mean for it to read like that. I was meaning; it is only circumstantial evidence that the scent was Maddies and she died in the apartment. That is why it is still a Thesis, and the case was shelved.
Plenty of evidence she is missing:)
according to grime it is not circumstantial evidence,,,the alert has no evidential reliability,,,grime is the expert
-
according to grime it is not circumstantial evidence,,,the alert has no evidential reliability,,,grime is the expert
The circumstantial evidence is nothing to do with Grime. The circumstantial evidence is that Maddie was missing and the dog alerted.
-
They got Prout and others on dog alerts and the lie detector. Let's ask the tapas 9 to take a lie detector if they say they're innocent. They wouldn't do it but at least everyone in the world would know they refused to do it. For a lie detector you have tell the truth to pass so no chance of that happening @)(++(*
Presumably you have read about lie-detectors in order to reach your informed opinion that they are reliable? Which studies did you read? Can you recommend a good scientific paper on the subject ?
-
They would never take one but I would like to see real public pressure and their reactions if asked. The public may demand it. A national poll would be interesting. Good for Amaral for putting pressure on the investigation. He seems to be the only one and may it continue.
-
The circumstantial evidence is nothing to do with Grime. The circumstantial evidence is that Maddie was missing and the dog alerted.
anything to do with dogs is to do with grime......there is no evidence that connects the dogs alerts to maddie
-
No one has set up blogs to attack Amaral ???
Who are you trying to kid ?
I think you may confuse honest critique with "attack".
The two are quite different
-
Alice Gross missing: Madeleine McCann search dogs used in hunt for missing teen.
29 September 2014
By Tom Pettifor
The springer spaniels, called Tito and Muzzy, are helping officers from more than 20 forces trying to find the 14-year-old who hasn’t been seen for over a month.
Police sniffer dogs used in searches for both Madeleine McCann and April Jones joined the hunt for missing schoolgirl Alice Gross.
The springer spaniels, called Tito and Muzzy, are helping a team of officers from more than 20 forces trying to find the 14-year-old who hasn’t been seen for over a month.
The dogs – trained in finding concealed bodies – are working with their South Wales police handlers.
A spokesman confirmed they took part in the ongoing hunt for Madeleine in June seven years after she disappeared aged three in Praia da Luz, Portugal.
They were also used during the hunt for five-year-old April before she was found murdered in 2012.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/alice-gross-missing-madeleine-mccann-4348073