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: Mr Gray on May 15, 2016, 05:04:44 PM
-
We are told by SY and others that Maddie may still be alive. If so...what was it that caused the cadaver dog to alert.
263
-
We are told by SY and others that Maddie may still be alive. If so...what was it that caused the cadaver dog to alert.
It is called a body dave.
As to Madeleine, NOT A TRACE.
-
It is called a body dave.
As to Madeleine, NOT A TRACE.
seems like you haven't understood the question.
-
We are told by SY and others that Maddie may still be alive. If so...what was it that caused the cadaver dog to alert.
Old blood under a tile behind the sofa, residue scent of anything from the garden or something with blood on it then removed in the bedroom, he played with cuddle cat and he played with the clothes.
-
Answer.
A range of compounds associated with blood and/or material associated with a body.
That is what the dogs do, and what they are trained for.
The dogs have no agenda, they do as they are trained.
FACT.
-
Answer.
A range of compounds associated with blood and/or material associated with a body.
That is what the dogs do, and what they are trained for.
The dogs have no agenda, they do as they are trained.
FACT.
Thank you
So if Maddie is still alive
What triggered the alert
-
Thank you
So if Maddie is still alive
What triggered the alert
Perhaps that's the bit that's wrong.
-
Thank you
So if Maddie is still alive
What triggered the alert
I already did dave, some time ago.
-
I already did dave, some time ago.
so if maddie is still alive who's body did the dogs alert to...
-
Perhaps that's the bit that's wrong.
we don't know...that is the point
-
No blood alert on the clothes so what do you think Eddie alerted to.......Persil?
-
No blood alert on the clothes so what do you think Eddie alerted to.......Persil?
Does running over them, picking up sundry items and throwing them around count as an alert? What were the forensic results obtained from the 'chosen' items?
-
Does running over them, picking up sundry items and throwing them around count as an alert? What were the forensic results obtained from the 'chosen' items?
"'Dead body scent' cannot be removed by cleaning. The compounds adhere to surfaces. The scent can be 'masked' by bleach and other strong smelling odours but the dog's olfactory system is able to separate odour and identify
specific compounds' and mixes to cellular level. A similar system would be a device similar to an electron microscope." MG
-
We are told by SY and others that Maddie may still be alive. If so...what was it that caused the cadaver dog to alert.
Who are these 'others'?
-
"'Dead body scent' cannot be removed by cleaning. The compounds adhere to surfaces. The scent can be 'masked' by bleach and other strong smelling odours but the dog's olfactory system is able to separate odour and identify
specific compounds' and mixes to cellular level. A similar system would be a device similar to an electron microscope." MG
so if Maddie did not die in the apartment...what body was eddie alerting to
-
Who are these 'others'?
one of amarals lawyers and the current pj team
-
"'Dead body scent' cannot be removed by cleaning. The compounds adhere to surfaces. The scent can be 'masked' by bleach and other strong smelling odours but the dog's olfactory system is able to separate odour and identify
specific compounds' and mixes to cellular level. A similar system would be a device similar to an electron microscope." MG
I think you misunderstand the situation regarding 'stand alone evidence' status of a VRD alert. In the recent case in the Scottish courts where intelligence from dog alerts was allowed to be heard by the jury ... it was not allowed in isolation. The prosecution had enough evidence to take the case into court, of which the dog alert was one small component.
-
I think you misunderstand the situation regarding 'stand alone evidence' status of a VRD alert. In the recent case in the Scottish courts where intelligence from dog alerts was allowed to be heard by the jury ... it was not allowed in isolation. The prosecution had enough evidence to take the case into court, of which the dog alert was one small component.
I'm not misunderstanding anything. This was always going to be a circumstantial evidence case.
-
I'm not misunderstanding anything. This was always going to be a circumstantial evidence case.
If the Portuguese investigations uncovered evidence circumstantial or otherwise ... not a shred of it pointed to any involvement of Madeleine's parents in her disappearance.
Misinterpretation of the significance of the dog alerts and undue haste in getting the case wrapped was disastrous for the proper investigation of Madeleine's case.
-
The investigators looked into this situation most carefully and researched the history of apartment 5a. There was no record of anyone having died in the apartment or of a body being waked there.
Taken at their highest, the alerts are both puzzling and suspicious.
-
The investigators looked into this situation most carefully and researched the history of apartment 5a. There was no record of anyone having died in the apartment or of a body being waked there.
Taken at their highest, the alerts are both puzzling and suspicious.
..and only with possessions belonging to the mccanns.
-
The investigators looked into this situation most carefully and researched the history of apartment 5a. There was no record of anyone having died in the apartment or of a body being waked there.
Taken at their highest, the alerts are both puzzling and suspicious.
This is thee whole point. SY...the PJ and one of amarals lawyers have said maddie may still be alive...in that instance...what did the cadaver dog alert to
-
This is thee whole point. SY...the PJ and one of amarals lawyers have said maddie may still be alive...in that instance...what did the cadaver dog alert to
You would have thought that with a huge fund to draw on, the McCanns would have found out.
-
You would have thought that with a huge fund to draw on, the McCanns would have found out.
Absolutely.
Yet no trace of her at all.
-
so still no explanation...but there has to be an explanation...and the first conclusion has to be the alerts were not to maddie...it is therefore possible that none of the cadaver alerts were to maddie
-
I have been giving explanations for this for several years...what is interesting is that no sceptic has supplied an explanation...there has to be one
-
one of amarals lawyers and the current pj team
Do you have cites for that assertion?
-
so still no explanation...but there has to be an explanation...and the first conclusion has to be the alerts were not to maddie...it is therefore possible that none of the cadaver alerts were to maddie
It is an established fact, there had been no other bodies in the apartment.
-
Do you have cites for that assertion?
Do you remember amarals lawyer asking for the trial to be held in camera to protect maddie in case she was still alive
-
I have been giving explanations for this for several years...what is interesting is that no sceptic has supplied an explanation...there has to be one
Seems a bit of a pointless thread if you already have the answers.
-
It is an established fact, there had been no other bodies in the apartment.
are you under the false impression that the alerts have to be to a body in 5a...you are wrong
-
Seems a bit of a pointless thread if you already have the answers.
the thread is designed to show that the sceptic argument does not fit all scenarios and is therefore flawed...and it is doing very well
-
are you under the false impression that the alerts have to be to a body in 5a...you are wrong
You are trying to imply they can't be.
There were no alerts to any property not belonging to the mccanns.
FACT.
-
You are trying to imply they can't be.
There were no alerts to any property not belonging to the mccanns.
FACT.
again you show you do not understand a simple statement
-
are you under the false impression that the alerts have to be to a body in 5a...you are wrong
...so you have the evidence about which other source caused the alert?
-
...so you have the evidence about which other source caused the alert?
we have an alert......we have a statement that maddie may still be alive from the police...so what caused the alert
In that instance youn have to accept that the alert was not caused by maddie...so it would have to be caused by something else...do you have any suggestions
-
we have an alert......we have a statement that maddie may still be alive from the police...so what caused the alert
In that instance youn have to accept that the alert was not caused by maddie...so it would have to be caused by something else...do you have any suggestions
No, we do not have to accept the alerts were not caused by Madeleine.
-
I have asked the question...again you obviously do not have an answer which shows the flaw in your beliefs
The only possible body in 5A is clearly the missing person.
-
If maddie is still alive...as she may be...what caused the dogs to alert
-
we have an alert......we have a statement that maddie may still be alive from the police...so what caused the alert
In that instance youn have to accept that the alert was not caused by maddie...so it would have to be caused by something else...do you have any suggestions
What's more to the point is, do you?
-
No, we do not have to accept the alerts were not caused by Madeleine.
if maddie is still alive...the alerts could not have been caused by her
-
The only possible body in 5A is clearly the missing person.
I agree the only body could be the missing person...the alerts do not have to be to a body
-
if maddie is still alive...the alerts could not have been caused by her
You have zero evidence that Madeleine is alive when a cadaver dog has alerted many times suggest she sadly is not.
-
What's more to the point is, do you?
I have several
-
if maddie is still alive...the alerts could not have been caused by her
So again, if alive, where would she be ?
Easy to answer if you believe she is alive.
-
Abduction, abduction and abduction.
Yet not one iota of evidence, forensic or otherwise to support it.
-
Davel, if you believe you have valid alternative sources for the alert, why would you not want or share them?
-
Davel, if you believe you have valid alternative sources for the alert, why would you not want or share them?
I already have done and sceptics do not accept them...I'm interested if sceptics have an explanation but obvioulsly they don't....the idea of thread is not to argue about explanations...but to see if posters such as you have one...and you don't
-
The beckon-call of their handler (answer to the opening post).
-
I already have done and sceptics do not accept them...I'm interested if sceptics have an explanation but obvioulsly they don't....the idea of thread is not to argue about explanations...but to see if posters such as you have one...and you don't
No dave.
This whole thread is about casting doubt on the dogs indications.
Despite the fact they did not indicate to any other peoples belongings, other than the mccanns.
Likewise, the dogs did what they were trained to do.
Indicate.
-
The beckon-call of their handler (answer to the opening post).
They did what they were trained to do.
-
Abduction, abduction and abduction.
Yet not one iota of evidence, forensic or otherwise to support it.
Yet SY are following that route Stephen, they say they may find Madeleine alive, so they have ditched the dogs findings.
-
Yet SY are following that route Stephen, they say they may find Madeleine alive, so they have ditched the dogs findings.
Well you can believe in fantasies.
As to the dogs findings, if they are of no matter why the concern, and never forget, the lack of confirmatory evidence, does not mean it won't be found.
SY have found nothing, they are no further than the original investigation.
Meanwhile the clock is ticking down for the mccanns and the Supreme Court.
-
No blood alert on the clothes so what do you think Eddie alerted to.......Persil?
Alerted to? he played with them, funny they were all together like that too isn't it?
-
Alerted to? he played with them, funny they were all together like that too isn't it?
You never had a dog ?
Have you never watched dogs in action when they search ?
-
Well you can believe in fantasies.
As to the dogs findings, if they are of no matter why the concern, and never forget, the lack of confirmatory evidence, does not mean it won't be found.
SY have found nothing, they are no further than the original investigation.
Meanwhile the clock is ticking down for the mccanns and the Supreme Court.
Aren't you happy that SY said they may find Madeleine alive? Why are you so worried they may be on to something, you keep saying they've found nothing, is that your hope to just prove you are right saying Madeleine is dead?
-
Aren't you happy that SY said they may find Madeleine alive? Why are you so worried they may be on to something, you keep saying they've found nothing, is that your hope to just prove you are right saying Madeleine is dead?
The so called investigation is winding down, shortly to be shelved.
Do keep up.
-
we have an alert......we have a statement that maddie may still be alive from the police...so what caused the alert
In that instance youn have to accept that the alert was not caused by maddie...so it would have to be caused by something else...do you have any suggestions
First of all you have to accept that SY is correct but given they have been unable to provide any proof that she is still alive I doubt the validity never mind the veracity of their claim.
-
The so called investigation is winding down, shortly to be shelved.
Do keep up.
Why so pleased the investigation is winding down Stephen? because they are not investigating the McCann's is it? It may be winding down but it will remain open if they don't find Madeleine and any new information and they will investigate again. As they do with all cases of missing children.
-
First of all you have to accept that SY is correct but given they have been unable to provide any proof that she is still alive I doubt the validity never mind the veracity of their claim.
the important FACT is that SY are prepared to accept she is alive ...despite the alerts...SY MUST therefore believe there is an alternative explanation for the alerts
-
Why so pleased the investigation is winding down Stephen? because they are not investigating the McCann's is it? It may be winding down but it will remain open if they don't find Madeleine and any new information and they will investigate again. As they do with all cases of missing children.
It is winding down because there is no evidence of abduction lace.
The investigation is at a dead end.
..and like I have said before, without an abduction , where do the roads lead ?
Ah yes, accidental death, or Madeleine waking out of the apartment.
-
the important FACT is that SY are prepared to accept she is alive ...despite the alerts...SY MUST therefore believe there is an alternative explanation for the alerts
So again, where would she be, if alive ?
That is not deflection.
If you and others claim shew may be alive, it is a very pertinent question.
Now try addressing it..
-
It is winding down because there is no evidence of abduction lace.
The investigation is at a dead end.
..and like I have said before, without an abduction , where do the roads lead ?
Ah yes, accidental death, or Madeleine waking out of the apartment.
again...if Maddie walked out of the apartment...a possibility...what triggered the alerts
-
So again, where would she be, if alive ?
That is not deflection.
If you and others claim shew may be alive, it is a very pertinent question.
Now try addressing it, just for once.
i haven't got a clue...there you are question answered
-
There is.
Incompetent handling.
Prove that.
[ moderated ]
-
It is winding down because there is no evidence of abduction lace.
The investigation is at a dead end.
..and like I have said before, without an abduction , where do the roads lead ?
Ah yes, accidental death, or Madeleine waking out of the apartment.
Don't be so ridiculous, they are not winding down because there is no evidence of abduction, it seems to me that they just can't prove it.
Do you know if Sarah Payne's brother had not seen the white van and the driver there would not have been any evidence that Sarah had been abducted? There doesn't have to be evidence Stephen, the fact that Madeleine disappeared is evidence enough, once the timeline has been investigated making it impossible for the McCann's to have been involved.
-
Do you remember amarals lawyer asking for the trial to be held in camera to protect maddie in case she was still alive
I've seen it referred to. but no cites. Are there any? Also I asked for cites for the current PJ investigation please.
You also need to acknowledge that SY had no fixed ideas and made different statements about Madeleine's possible fate, so the dog's alerts could fit with one of their ideas;
Redwood said McCann might have long been dead.
"There is always the potential that she didn't leave the apartment alive. What is important for us to do is consider all the options," he said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-mccann-idUSBREA2I1D220140319
-
Don't be so ridiculous, they are not winding down because there is no evidence of abduction, it seems to me that they just can't prove it.
Do you know if Sarah Payne's brother had not seen the white van and the driver there would not have been any evidence that Sarah had been abducted? There doesn't have to be evidence Stephen, the fact that Madeleine disappeared is evidence enough, once the timeline has been investigated making it impossible for the McCann's to have been involved.
Ah, deflection again.
Stick to the case.
Who said the timeline makes it impossible for the mccanns to be 'involved'.
You do realize that her disappearance can also be explained by other possibilities.
-
I've seen it referred to. but no cites. Are there any? Also I asked for cites for the current PJ investigation please.
You also need to acknowledge that SY had no fixed ideas and made different statements about Madeleine's possible fate, so the dog's alerts could fit with one of their ideas;
Redwood said McCann might have long been dead.
"There is always the potential that she didn't leave the apartment alive. What is important for us to do is consider all the options," he said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-mccann-idUSBREA2I1D220140319
at work at the moment will look for cites later...we do know SY consider maddie may be alive....and therefore do not consider that alerts were necessarily to maddie....so what other explanations are there...
I realise maddie amy have died in the apartment but then we have the problem of the time taken for scent to develop
-
Fair enough but is it not a coincidence that only McCann related clothing and areas were the subject of these alerts?
an explanation for taht has already been given
-
Don't be so ridiculous, they are not winding down because there is no evidence of abduction, it seems to me that they just can't prove it.
Do you know if Sarah Payne's brother had not seen the white van and the driver there would not have been any evidence that Sarah had been abducted? There doesn't have to be evidence Stephen, the fact that Madeleine disappeared is evidence enough, once the timeline has been investigated making it impossible for the McCann's to have been involved.
Don't be ridiculous Lace, the fact that she disappeared could be for many reasons including murder as voiced by Hogan-Howe not so long ago.
"The police chief said: “In the middle of all this quite often their torment gets lost.
“Have they lost a child by being murdered, sadly, or have they lost a child by someone else stealing them? Either way they have got that terrible uncertainty.”
www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/366431/Top-cop-Sir-Bernard-Hogan-Howe-says-names-of-Maddie-kidnappers-are-known
-
Don't be so ridiculous, they are not winding down because there is no evidence of abduction, it seems to me that they just can't prove it.
Do you know if Sarah Payne's brother had not seen the white van and the driver there would not have been any evidence that Sarah had been abducted? There doesn't have to be evidence Stephen, the fact that Madeleine disappeared is evidence enough, once the timeline has been investigated making it impossible for the McCann's to have been involved.
again ....if the mccanns are not involved abduction is a near certainty
-
again ....if the mccanns are not involved abduction is a near certainty
That statement is wholly untrue. If the McCann's weren't involved there is just as much chance she got out on her own as any abduction.
-
That statement is wholly untrue. If the McCann's weren't involved there is just as much chance she got out on her own as any abduction.
how would you explain the open window if the mccanns are not inolved
-
again...if Maddie walked out of the apartment...a possibility...what triggered the alerts
There is no getting away from it, if you exclude accidental cueing which I don't accept for a moment the alerts are certainly extremely suspicious.
-
how would you explain the open window if the mccanns are not inolved
There has been no independent verification of an open window before 10 pm.
-
how would you explain the open window if the mccanns are not inolved
As Stephen has pointed out, there is NO PROOF that there ever was an open shutter or window.
eta We only have Kate McCanns word for it. A former suspect who refers to police as Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dum and f..k1ng Tossers. Credibility is not her strong point imo.
-
As Stephen has pointed out, there is NO PROOF that there ever was an open shutter or window.
eta We only have Kate McCanns word for it. A former suspect who refers to police as Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dum and f..k1ng Tossers. Credibility is not her strong point imo.
I said if the mccanns are not involved.....abduction is a near certainty....if they are not involved they are not lying and the window was opened
-
Fair enough but is it not a coincidence that only McCann related clothing and areas were the subject of these alerts?
It is not coincidence that the same clothing Eddie could find no trace of a scent of in the villa, he, apparently could (after it had been incompetently transferred in bog-standard cardboard boxes), in the gym.
It is not coincidence that the only vehicle of interest (in a nominal line-up of 10) was the one with the findMadeleine stickers plastered over the back window.
It is not coincidence that alerts were (eventually) forthcoming in apartment 5a after an inordinate length of time had been spent in that apartment; with all other apartments taking in whistle-stop tours.
I don't directly blame Grime for Amaral's book.
But I neither think there's too much doubt that, but for Grime; or, if Grime had handled his dogs competently, Amaral's book would never have been written.
-
It is not coincidence that the same clothing Eddie could find no trace of a scent of in the villa, he, apparently could (after it had been incompetently transferred in bog-standard cardboard boxes), in the gym.
It is not coincidence that the only vehicle of interest (in a nominal line-up of 10) was the one with the findMadeleine stickers plastered over the back window.
It is not coincidence that alerts were (eventually) forthcoming in apartment 5a after an inordinate length of time had been spent in that apartment; with all other apartments taking in whistle-stop tours.
I don't directly blame Grime for Amaral's book.
But I neither think there's too much doubt that, but for Grime; or, if Grime had handled his dogs competently, Amaral's book would never have been written.
Grime did his job, the one he was paid to do.
He had no axe to grind.
YOU DO.
-
Grime did his job, the one he was paid to do.
He had no axe to grind.
YOU DO.
*&*%£
-
*&*%£
What are you laughing about ferryman ?
You 'support' the mccanns at every point, and therefore attack Grime.
Not hard to see why you do it.
-
so...IF Maddie is still alive...what triggered the alerts...were they false positives
-
Right, ENOUGH!! I have deleted dozens of disruptive posts this morning but will be awarding points if this continues.
-
so...IF Maddie is still alive...what triggered the alerts...were they false positives
The answer is that they could have alerted to various things including cadaverine. The dogs were in an alien environment in Portugal where extreme heat could have had an effect on everyday substances leading the dogs to get confused. Bringing dogs from cold and wet England was a mistake, they were out of their comfort zone imo.
-
The answer is that they could have alerted to various things including cadaverine. The dogs were in an alien environment in Portugal where extreme heat could have had an effect on everyday substances leading the dogs to get confused. Bringing dogs from cold and wet England was a mistake, they were out of their comfort zone imo.
thank you angelo...a perfectly valid answer
-
Extreme heat ?
What extreme heat was that ?
The dogs are trained in a variety of situations and environments, and their sense of smell is extremely acute.
-
Extreme heat ?
What extreme heat was that ?
The dogs are trained in a variety of situations and environments, and their sense of smell is extremely acute.
take it up with angelo
-
take it up with angelo
You mean you don't know.
Can you remind me where the testing sites were ?
Outside or inside ? *&*%£
-
You mean you don't know.
Can you remind me where the testing sites were ?
Outside or inside ? *&*%£
it was angelos post ...take it up with him
-
This may help.
''Environmental Factors
Environmental factors must be considered when working a detection dog. Working a dog in the desert with high heat hasvery different concerns when compared to working a dog in snow and very cold climates.
The best conditions for working a dog are temperatures between 40°F and 75°F, moist ground, high humidity, and a light breeze.
Although dogs can work in extreme conditions, their working time is greatly reduced.
Factors for length of time working in the field are the above-mentioned weather conditions, what scent the dog is looking for, amount of water available to the dog, and the terrain.
Live human scent is the most abundant and available scent to the dog, with prehistoric graves being the most fragile and difficult.
Fatigue is also a factor as to how long a detection dog is effective in the field. Rest and water breaks are crucial to
keeping the detection dog an effective tool. Dogs that train and work regularly will build up their scenting endurance, but, as with an athlete, you must maintain a training program to keep a high level of endurance.
For a more successful search, the dog should be allowed time to adjust or acclimatize to each new search location.
This way the dog has time to adjust to local conditions and sort out normal background scents for the new area.
This also includes letting the dog acclimatize to different weather conditions, like humidity, heat, or cold.''
(Evolution of the Historical Human Remains Detection Dog: Choosing the Best Resource
Adela Morris & Donna Randolph, Institute for Canine Forensics
Paper presented at the Society for Historical Archaeology Annual Conference, Sacramento, CA, January 11 - 15, 2006)
-
Extreme heat ?
What extreme heat was that ?
The dogs are trained in a variety of situations and environments, and their sense of smell is extremely acute.
You do realise the heat and humidity in Portugal is totally different to that in the UK. When confronted with an alien environment and being unable to acclimatise properly I suspect the dogs were not at their best.
-
You do realise the heat and humidity in Portugal is totally different to that in the UK. When confronted with an alien environment I suspect the dogs were not at their best.
Have you read the article I cited Angelo ?
Likewise, SY employed Dogs from Wales in their tests in Portugal during 2014.
They had no problems doing that as far as I am aware.
-
Ferryman is entitled to his opinion as long as he doesn't claim it as fact.
It's difficult to tell the difference unless he adds 'IMO' or similar qualifiers.
-
Have you read the article I cited Angelo ?
Likewise, SY employed Dogs from Wales in their tests in Portugal during 2014.
They had no problems doing that as far as I am aware.
eddie was older...looked like he was knackered in the heat
-
Having cast an eye over all my posts on this thread, I've not stated any opinions.
-
eddie was older...looked like he was knackered in the heat
So davel says Eddie looked knackered.
If such an observation were to go to court, not that it will, that comment would be laughed out of Court with the contempt it deserves. *&*%£
-
So davel says Eddie looked knackered.
If such an observation were to go to court, not that it will, that comment would be laughed out of Court with the contempt it deserves. *&*%£
There is a kernel of truth in a flippant comment.
It is well-documented that one (possible) contributory factor to alerting-errors is that the dog (generic!) is tired through being pushed too hard.
-
There is a kernel of truth in a flippant comment.
It is well-documented that one (possible) contributory factor to alerting-errors is that the dog (generic!) is tired through being pushed too hard.
So you're expertise in the subject would tell you Eddie was knackered ? @)(++(*
-
So you're expertise in the subject would tell you Eddie was knackered ? @)(++(*
I've no doubt there'll be another expert along shortly to give support to the idea.
-
I've no doubt there'll be another expert along shortly to give support to the idea.
No doubt.
%£5&% %£5&%
-
I've no doubt there'll be another expert along shortly to give support to the idea.
Phonetically.
Ex spurt
X = the unknown factor
Spurt = a drip under pressure.
-
So davel says Eddie looked knackered.
If such an observation were to go to court, not that it will, that comment would be laughed out of Court with the contempt it deserves. *&*%£
an uncorroborated alert would not be put before a court
-
Phonetically.
Ex spurt
X = the unknown factor
Spurt = a drip under pressure.
Almost as original as Father Christmas and the tooth-fairy ....
-
an uncorroborated alert would not be put before a court
Try reading again.
I know it would not go in front of the court. 8)-)))
-
Does anyone else think it odd that the clothes Eddie is supposed to have alerted to were all together? They came out of the box one after the other.
-
Does anyone else think it odd that the clothes Eddie is supposed to have alerted to were all together? They came out of the box one after the other.
I wouldn't use the word odd.
And you don't have to be dog-handling expert to use the word I would use.
You just need a basic understanding of rudimentary principles (of dog-handling) which Grime, in his rogatory interviews, confirmed he has.
Hence the reason he was asked the questions he was.
And hence the reason it is all the more inexplicable (if you tend to a view that Grime handled his dogs competently) that he went about his business the way he did.
-
I have been giving explanations for this for several years...what is interesting is that no sceptic has supplied an explanation...there has to be one
Why does there have to be one..especially from a 'sceptic' given that they believe it was Madeleines body the dogs picked up on? Not really understanding this tbh...seems like asking someone who believes OP knew he was shooting Reeva to come up with an explanation how he thought it was a stranger?
-
Why does there have to be one..especially from a 'sceptic' given that they believe it was Madeleines body the dogs picked up on? Not really understanding this tbh...seems like asking someone who believes OP knew he was shooting Reeva to come up with an explanation how he thought it was a stranger?
It is mere Deflection Chloë.
-
Why does there have to be one..especially from a 'sceptic' given that they believe it was Madeleines body the dogs picked up on? Not really understanding this tbh...seems like asking someone who believes OP knew he was shooting Reeva to come up with an explanation how he thought it was a stranger?
There has to be one because SY have told us they believe maddie may still be alive...so SY who we would expect understand the alerts believe that the dogs may not have been alerting to Maddie. We are told that the sceptics are open minded...it seems that they are totally closed minded because not one can come up with a scenario that fits the bill
-
The answer is that they could have alerted to various things including cadaverine. The dogs were in an alien environment in Portugal where extreme heat could have had an effect on everyday substances leading the dogs to get confused. Bringing dogs from cold and wet England was a mistake, they were out of their comfort zone imo.
Then SY did it again when they had their digfest. None too bright these policemen? Or a load of rubbish that heat affects the dog's ability to do their job?
-
The dogs are trained in a variety of conditions as the link I provided earlier clearly demonstrates.
To imply the heat affected them is quite ludicrous.
-
There has to be one because SY have told us they believe maddie may still be alive...so SY who we would expect understand the alerts believe that the dogs may not have been alerting to Maddie. We are told that the sceptics are open minded...it seems that they are totally closed minded because not one can come up with a scenario that fits the bill
Redwood also said she may not have left the apartment alive. Perhaps he (understanding dog alerts as you say) thought the dogs may have been alerting to Madeleine. Or was he just covering all possibilities because he didn't actually have a clue what happened?
-
Redwood also said she may not have left the apartment alive. Perhaps he (understanding dog alerts as you say) thought the dogs may have been alerting to Madeleine. Or was he just covering all possibilities because he didn't actually have a clue what happened?
Redwood knew the cadaver dog alerted and he was prepared to say Maddie might still be alive...he therefore was not convinced the alert was to Maddie
-
Redwood knew the cadaver dog alerted and he was prepared to say Maddie might still be alive...he therefore was not convinced the alert was to Maddie
That's your spin.
What is more likely is that Redwood and SY think the alert was to Madie but can't be 100% certain.
-
Redwood also said she may not have left the apartment alive. Perhaps he (understanding dog alerts as you say) thought the dogs may have been alerting to Madeleine. Or was he just covering all possibilities because he didn't actually have a clue what happened?
A precise summation G-Unit.
-
That's your spin.
What is more likely is that Redwood and SY think the alert was to Madie but can't be 100% certain.
That's your spin and pure speculation
Redwood said he thought Maddie could still be alive
He didn't have to say that
He therefore was willing to ignore the alerts
-
Redwood knew the cadaver dog alerted and he was prepared to say Maddie might still be alive...he therefore was not convinced the alert was to Maddie
Nor was he convinced she was alive. Both scenarios are possible. Some think one or the other is more likely;
to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
-
Nor was he convinced she was alive. Both scenarios are possible. Some think one or the other is more likely;
to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
I agree
But to consider she is alive Redwood has to believe that the alerts were not to maddie
-
There has been no dead body in the apartment before the mccanns stayed there.
-
There has been no dead body in the apartment before the mccanns stayed there.
So if Maddie may be still alive
What triggered the alert
-
Have you read the article I cited Angelo ?
Likewise, SY employed Dogs from Wales in their tests in Portugal during 2014.
They had no problems doing that as far as I am aware.
The 2014 searches using dogs were not the same as those conducted by Grime in 2007.
-
So if Maddie may be still alive
What triggered the alert
Until such time as her body is found or other irrefutable evidence as to her demise is identified it is only logical that she may be alive. That has no impact on the normal (not religious) beliefs of SY or Redwood.
-
The 2014 searches using dogs were not the same as those conducted by Grime in 2007.
True. They were out in the sun. Grime's searches were done at night indoors.
-
Until such time as her body is found or other irrefutable evidence as to her demise is identified it is only logical that she may be alive. That has no impact on the normal (not religious) beliefs of SY or Redwood.
so there is no evidence of here demise...so what were the dogs alerting to
-
so there is no evidence of here demise...so what were the dogs alerting to
I believe members have already made suggestions.
-
I believe members have already made suggestions.
only angelo.....no one else
-
There has to be one because SY have told us they believe maddie may still be alive...so SY who we would expect understand the alerts believe that the dogs may not have been alerting to Maddie. We are told that the sceptics are open minded...it seems that they are totally closed minded because not one can come up with a scenario that fits the bill
Not really sure how not making up scenario that could fit a theory that they disagree with means anyone is close minded?
Lets not forget SY also reckon tannerman came forward after however many years and still had the same clothes and such that he/his child were wearing that night. Something that a lot of 'supporters' and 'skeptics' alike have agreed on it being ridiculous...
-
Not really sure how not making up scenario that could fit a theory that they disagree with means anyone is close minded?
Lets not forget SY also reckon tannerman came forward after however many years and still had the same clothes and such that he/his child were wearing that night. Something that a lot of 'supporters' and 'skeptics' alike have agreed on it being ridiculous...
I think failure to accept one of the few facts in this case,,,that is that SY do not accept that the dogs alerted to Maddie is close minded.....
I don't accept the alerts are to maddie because of the necessary PMI...
-
I think failure to accept one of the few facts in this case,,,that is that SY do not accept that the dogs alerted to Maddie is close minded.....
I don't accept the alerts are to maddie because of the necessary PMI...
Flawless logic ...
-
I agree
But to consider she is alive Redwood has to believe that the alerts were not to maddie
The PJ pinned their hopes on the alerts and didn't find the necessary evidence. Redwood knew that so he wasn't going to take the same route. He seems to have decided to explore every possibility; dead, alive, sex offenders, burglars etc. He dug, he looked again at forensics, he analysed phone traffic, he interviewed people. It's not possible to declare categorically what he thought from what he chose to say in public.
-
Flawless logic ...
TO THE CONTRARY.
SY have progressed no further than the PJ did in their original investigation.
They have failed to find how Madeleine was removed from the apartment, assuming of course she didn't walk out herself.
Likewise, they have no idea as to her fate.
That is the truth and logic of the situation, and no prevarication will change that.
-
The PJ pinned their hopes on the alerts and didn't find the necessary evidence. Redwood knew that so he wasn't going to take the same route. He seems to have decided to explore every possibility; dead, alive, sex offenders, burglars etc. He dug, he looked again at forensics, he analysed phone traffic, he interviewed people. It's not possible to declare categorically what he thought from what he chose to say in public.
The PJ should have listened to people about them who understood the dogs.
They didn't (or more accurately, certain PJ officers didn't, PJ Inspector Dias, a notable, and honourable, PJ exception)
-
The PJ pinned their hopes on the alerts and didn't find the necessary evidence. Redwood knew that so he wasn't going to take the same route. He seems to have decided to explore every possibility; dead, alive, sex offenders, burglars etc. He dug, he looked again at forensics, he analysed phone traffic, he interviewed people. It's not possible to declare categorically what he thought from what he chose to say in public.
Bottom line, Redwood did not have any idea what happened to Madeleine.
If he did, he could have stayed with the investigation and claimed all the glory.
He didn't.
That is simple logic.
-
TO THE CONTRARY.
SY have progressed no further than the PJ did in their original investigation.
They have failed to find how Madeleine was removed from the apartment, assuming of course she didn't walk out herself.
Likewise, they have no idea as to her fate.
That is the truth and logic of the situation, and no prevarication will change that.
SY have managed to understand the evidence...so that's a relief
-
Bottom line, Redwood did not have any idea what happened to Madeleine.
If he did, he could have stayed with the investigation and claimed all the glory.
He didn't.
That is simple logic.
I agree. If a solution had been on the horizon he wouldn't have retired. His successor seems to have said and done nothing. It looks very like any drive to solve the case departed with Redwood.
-
The PJ pinned their hopes on the alerts and didn't find the necessary evidence. Redwood knew that so he wasn't going to take the same route. He seems to have decided to explore every possibility; dead, alive, sex offenders, burglars etc. He dug, he looked again at forensics, he analysed phone traffic, he interviewed people. It's not possible to declare categorically what he thought from what he chose to say in public.
they didn't find the evidence because it wasn't there
-
I agree
But to consider she is alive Redwood has to believe that the alerts were not to maddie
So who or what were they looking for when they dug up parts of Praia da Luz in 2014?
(http://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/1/590x/secondary/168541.jpg)
(http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/1504962/original/?width=630&version=1504962)
-
Lets not forget SY also reckon tannerman came forward after however many years and still had the same clothes and such that he/his child were wearing that night. Something that a lot of 'supporters' and 'skeptics' alike have agreed on it being ridiculous...
Not sure which part was ridiculous Chloe. Was it the fact this witness came forward or the fact he kept his daughters clothes for all these years? In respect of the latter, I have clothing which my children wore twenty years ago so I don't find that bit odd at all.
-
they didn't find the evidence because it wasn't there
so what happened to the D N A..that was there
Manuel Rodrigues - Obviously. I cannot say anything else differently. I cannot have a different interpretation when in a first exam that was done in an English laboratory, because the Portuguese had the honesty of sending them the evidence, they weren't even analysed here - 'let's send it to England so they can carry out the tests so no doubts remain', in a first moment...
Anchor - Honesty or naivety?
Manuel Rodrigues - Pure naivety. In a first moment 15 alleles of a series of 19 appear, that constituted Maddie's DNA, and in a second report those 15 alleles had completely vanished, there was no longer any DNA of the girl present in there.
Rui Pereira - The Judiciary Police was under great pressure by the huge media coverage of the case, it was very active then and at a certain point in time it short-circuited, and why? Because what happened in the Algarve was that negligent parents left their children helpless, who could not defend themselves from natural or human threats, all alone! And in the sequence of that, which initially was a crime of abandonment, the child disappeared - there are no doubt about this.
Tânia Laranjo - And that was everyday.
-
so what happened to the D N A..that was there
Manuel Rodrigues - Obviously. I cannot say anything else differently. I cannot have a different interpretation when in a first exam that was done in an English laboratory, because the Portuguese had the honesty of sending them the evidence, they weren't even analysed here - 'let's send it to England so they can carry out the tests so no doubts remain', in a first moment...
Anchor - Honesty or naivety?
Manuel Rodrigues - Pure naivety. In a first moment 15 alleles of a series of 19 appear, that constituted Maddie's DNA, and in a second report those 15 alleles had completely vanished, there was no longer any DNA of the girl present in there.
Rui Pereira - The Judiciary Police was under great pressure by the huge media coverage of the case, it was very active then and at a certain point in time it short-circuited, and why? Because what happened in the Algarve was that negligent parents left their children helpless, who could not defend themselves from natural or human threats, all alone! And in the sequence of that, which initially was a crime of abandonment, the child disappeared - there are no doubt about this.
Tânia Laranjo - And that was everyday.
There was definitely something fishy going on at the FSS. Scientists appeared to have been telling Portuguese investigators one thing off the record and another in formal reports? The PJ made the mistake of acting on what they were told in good faith, they must have been shocked at what came later.
-
There was definitely something fishy going on at the FSS. Scientists appeared to have been telling Portuguese investigators one thing off the record and another in formal reports? The PJ made the mistake of acting on what they were told in good faith, they must have been shocked at what came later.
don't agree John...more likely the portuguese misunderstood. The report re the 15 alleles is still there...and still being misunderstood
Again this is more of the so called evidence...which is actually total BS that is used against the McCanns..
-
There was definitely something fishy going on at the FSS. Scientists appeared to have been telling Portuguese investigators one thing off the record and another in formal reports? The PJ made the mistake of acting on what they were told in good faith, they must have been shocked at what came later.
This is plain wrong, John, disinformation spread in Amaral's book.
John Lowe wrote an explanatory email (inaccurately referred to by Amaral as a "preliminary report") to Stuart Prior about a particular result (from the boot of the hire-care).
He said that there were any number of (possible, and innocent) explanations for the possible presence of Madeleine's DNA (distinct from Madeleine herself!) in the DNA mix from the boot of the car.
Secondary transfer (of Madeleine's DNA) from items of Madeleine's (clothing etc) carried in the car might be one.
Having established that Madeleine's DNA might, indeed, be in the mix (for wholly innocent reasons) Lowe contented himself, in his one-and-only report, in saying that a result from the boot was inconclusive.
Amaral incompetently misinterpreted that as the FSS changing their minds and bottling out (of the implication that Madeleine might have been transported somewhere dead in the Renault).
Amaral libelled the McCanns, John Lowe and the FSS in a single fell swoop.
Unbelievable.
-
There was definitely something fishy going on at the FSS. Scientists appeared to have been telling Portuguese investigators one thing off the record and another in formal reports? The PJ made the mistake of acting on what they were told in good faith, they must have been shocked at what came later.
This post is wild speculation with nothing to support it...but posters like it....an example of the BS used to attack the MccCanns
-
This post is wild speculation with nothing to support it...but posters like it....an example of the BS used to attack the MccCanns
Didn't the one and only Martin Brunt report the same thing, hardly BS.
-
This is plain wrong, John, disinformation spread in Amaral's book.
John Lowe wrote an explanatory email (inaccurately referred to by Amaral as a "preliminary report") to Stuart Prior about a particular result (from the boot of the hire-care).
He said that there were any number of (possible, and innocent) explanations for the possible presence of Madeleine's DNA (distinct from Madeleine herself!) in the DNA mix from the boot of the car.
Secondary transfer (of Madeleine's DNA) from items of Madeleine's (clothing etc) carried in the car might be one.
Having established that Madeleine's DNA might, indeed, be in the mix (for wholly innocent reasons) Lowe contented himself, in his one-and-only report, in saying that a result from the boot was inconclusive.
Amaral incompetently misinterpreted that as the FSS changing their minds and bottling out (of the implication that Madeleine might have been transported somewhere dead in the Renault).
Amaral libelled the McCanns, John Lowe and the FSS in a single fell swoop.
Unbelievable.
Neither you nor I were party to what was being said behind the scenes. In particular, what was being discussed on telephone calls between the FSS and the Portuguese Police. What is clear however is that there were many ambiguities in relation to the DNA results, a problem which appears to have plagued the FSS and eventually led to the decision to dismantle it a mere three years after Madeleine disappeared.
Whether Amaral may or may not have misunderstood what he was being told is neither here nor there. The point is that this should never have happened, incompetence and failures all round imo. No wonder the FSS was later closed down!
The FSS suffered damage to its reputation following the failure to recover blood stains from a shoe in the murder of Damilola Taylor. Further damage occurred when the FSS failed to use the most up-to-date techniques for extracting DNA samples in cases between 2000 and 2005. This led the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to advise all police forces in England and Wales to review cases where samples had failed to give a DNA profile.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_Science_Service
-
Didn't the one and only Martin Brunt report the same thing, hardly BS.
brunt said...according to police reports...so total BS
-
Clearly a sensitive issue, judging by the vigorous response. 8(0(*
-
The FSS suffered damage to its reputation following the failure to recover blood stains from a shoe in the murder of Damilola Taylor. Further damage occurred when the FSS failed to use the most up-to-date techniques for extracting DNA samples in cases between 2000 and 2005. This led the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to advise all police forces in England and Wales to review cases where samples had failed to give a DNA profile.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_Science_Service
I wonder did Redwood carry out such a review of the forensics in this case?
-
I wonder did Redwood carry out such a review of the forensics in this case?
As the FSS was closed down and service subsequently provided by private contractors, I wonder where historical records are kept.
-
Neither you nor I were party to what was being said behind the scenes. In particular, what was being discussed on telephone calls between the FSS and the Portuguese Police. What is clear however is that there were many ambiguities in relation to the DNA results, a problem which appears to have plagued the FSS and eventually led to the decision to dismantle it a mere three years after Madeleine disappeared.
Whether Amaral may or may not have misunderstood what he was being told is neither here nor there. The point is that this should never have happened, incompetence and failures all round imo. No wonder the FSS was later closed down!
The FSS suffered damage to its reputation following the failure to recover blood stains from a shoe in the murder of Damilola Taylor. Further damage occurred when the FSS failed to use the most up-to-date techniques for extracting DNA samples in cases between 2000 and 2005. This led the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to advise all police forces in England and Wales to review cases where samples had failed to give a DNA profile.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forensic_Science_Service
what languages were used in these phone calls ......portuguese or english.....if they took place. There were absolutely no ambiguities in the dna results...the FSS was not closed down due to any failings it was totally on costs basis. Lots of speculation yet you use the word definitely.
The FSS developed LCN DNA analysis...they were an extremely competent lab. They made a mistake in the DT case.....who doesnt make mistakes. Your next statement is totally incorrect....the review of cases was based on the reliability of LCN DNA in light of the court verdict in the Omagh bombings....nothing to do with the FSS incompetence but the interpretation of LCN results..your criticism of the FSS is out of order...innaccurate and probably libellous
-
the reason the FSS closed was that it was a govt run lab and made a 2 million pound loss...work is now contracted out to the private sector
The UK Government announced the closure of the FSS in December 2010, citing monthly losses of up to £2m as justification.
-
Not sure which part was ridiculous Chloe. Was it the fact this witness came forward or the fact he kept his daughters clothes for all these years? In respect of the latter, I have clothing which my children wore twenty years ago so I don't find that bit odd at all.
Someone coming forward after so many years, knowing exactly what he was wearing one night years back, and that he hadnt realized all of this time that HE was who the world was looking for...its just unrealistic :p
-
Manuel Rodrigues - Pure naivety. In a first moment 15 alleles of a series of 19 appear, that constituted Maddie's DNA, and in a second report those 15 alleles had completely vanished, there was no longer any DNA of the girl present in there.
one of G A biggest regrets was trusting...british fss/birmingham ...sending them there in the first place
but there you are at the time he thought they were all wanting the same thing ...
the truth of what happened ...you know as the police usually do ............work together ...but there you go ...they didn't
-
Manuel Rodrigues - Pure naivety. In a first moment 15 alleles of a series of 19 appear, that constituted Maddie's DNA, and in a second report those 15 alleles had completely vanished, there was no longer any DNA of the girl present in there.
one of G A biggest regrets was trusting...british fss/birmingham ...sending them there in the first place
but there you are at the time he thought they were all wanting the same thing ...
the truth of what happened ...you know as the police usually do ............work together ...but there you go ...they didn't
the 15 alleles are still there ..they never disappeared...you are repeating claptrap propaganda
-
what languages were used in these phone calls ......portuguese or english.....if they took place.there were absolutely no ambiguities in the dna results...the FSS was not closed down due to any failings it was totally on costs basis. Lots of speculation yet you use the word defuinitely.
The FSS developed LCN DNA analysis...they were an extremely competent lab. They made a mistake in the DT case.....who doesnt make mistakes. Your next statement is totally incorrect....the review oif cases was based on the reliability of LCN DNA in light of the court verdict in the Omagh bombings.nothing to do with the FSS incompetence but the interpretation of LCN results..your criticism of the FSS is out of order...innaccurate and probably libellous
Can you libel a defunct organisation?
-
Can you libel a defunct organisation?
Individuals (named and identified) within the organisation, you certainly can, whether the organisation itself exists or not (provided the people concerned are still alive).
I believe, in Portugal, you can actually defame the dead.
Although I am beginning to wonder whether Portugal has libel laws (worthy of the name).
-
The dogs' indications are relevant only if evidence is recovered from the areas alerted to ... and uncorroborated statements from unidentified individuals in a propaganda video have as little value as a VRD throwing a child's cuddly toy around as a plaything. Both require a suspension of disbelief.
-
The dogs' indications are relevant only if evidence is recovered from the areas alerted to ... and uncorroborated statements from unidentified individuals in a propaganda video have as little value as a VRD throwing a child's cuddly toy around as a plaything. Both require a suspension of disbelief.
But we aren't allowed to add, also a questioning of the competence of the handler (I don't think) ....
-
But we aren't allowed to add, also a questioning of the competence of the handler (I don't think) ....
How long do UK incompetent police officers stay on in a force then? Do you know how many years grime served as a policeman/dog handler? Youre a glutton for punishment, people say you have an agenda, i never took too much notice of it, but its soooo obvious now, a real tangible agenda, not one of just of personal opinion, do you deny it? good luck
Apart from all that you have NO IDEA if grime is competent or not and also have NO IDEA how his dogs were trained so that makes your posts laymans guesses and accusations at best, ie you have no knowledge or authority to state anything you think at all as fact
-
How long do UK incompetent police officers stay on in a force then? Do you know how many years grime served as a policeman/dog handler? Youre a glutton for punishment, people say you have an agenda, i never took too much notice of it, but its soooo obvious now, a real tangible agenda, not one of just of personal opinion, do you deny it? good luck
Apart from all that you have NO IDEA if grime is competent or not and also have NO IDEA how his dogs were trained so that makes your posts laymans guesses and accusations at best, ie you have no knowledge or authority to state anything you think at all as fact
For an 'incompetent handler' he has certainly carved out a lucrative career for himself in the USA and is extremely well thought of by the FBI and many other police authorities as well as the California Narcotic Canine Association. His contribution to the CSI canine industry has been huge.
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/martin-grime-9724a78
http://www.gssi.uk.com/en/ourservices
-
How long do UK incompetent police officers stay on in a force then? Do you know how many years grime served as a policeman/dog handler? Youre a glutton for punishment, people say you have an agenda, i never took too much notice of it, but its soooo obvious now, a real tangible agenda, not one of just of personal opinion, do you deny it? good luck
Apart from all that you have NO IDEA if grime is competent or not and also have NO IDEA how his dogs were trained so that makes your posts laymans guesses and accusations at best, ie you have no knowledge or authority to state anything you think at all as fact
Why do you think Grime considered Eddie needed two stabs to (apparently) detect a scent on the same clothing in two separate inspections and in two separate locations?
With the death scent readily cross-transferable (immediately upon contact of one item with a surface or another item) why was clothing (already inspected in the villa without result) transported in bog-standard cardboard boxes to the gym (for a second!) inspection?
How can any of that be described as competent?
Do you have a better explanation than: dogs can't read for the findMadeleine stickers in the back of the Renaullt Scenic?
-
For an 'incompetent handler' he has certainly carved out a lucrative career for himself in the USA and is extremely well thought of by the FBI and many other police authorities. His contribution to the CSI canine industry has been huge.
https://uk.linkedin.com/in/martin-grime-9724a78
Is that why, these days, he confines himself to a local dog-training club in Oxford?
-
Why do you think Grime considered Eddie needed two stabs to (apparently) detect a scent on the same clothing in two separate inspections and in two separate locations?
With the death scent readily cross-transferable (immediately upon contact of one item with a surface or another item) why was clothing (already inspected in the villa without result) transported in bog-standard cardboard boxes to the gym (for a second! inspection?
How can any of that be described as competent?
Do you have a better explanation than: dogs can't read for the findMadeleine stickers in the back of the Renaullt Scenic?
I'm sorry ferryman but you cannot lay the blame for that at Grime's door. The PJ had the responsibility of providing premises, transporting the items and laying them out. Grime's job was to deploy the dogs, nothing else. You will be claiming next that he should have driven the cars to the car park too.
-
For an 'incompetent handler' he has certainly carved out a lucrative career for himself in the USA and is extremely well thought of by the FBI and many other police authorities. His contribution to the CSI canine industry has been huge.
Iirc he was in the force about 27 years and as you say his resume experience and reputation bears him out, funny how (well not really) just a few people are traducing (to use the latest fashionable phrase)him
It WAS the british police who aided the portuguese
It WAS the british mark harrison who was brought in and suggested testing the tapas 9 houses and cars
It WAS a british police dog expert brought in to find remnant scent of death
But it seems the portuguese got it all wrong /wanted to frame the mccanns/PLUS, just in case they didnt, ...next stop, mr grime was corrupt/out to make his new career on fixed coerced alerts/ should tell you everything
Bloody pathetic
-
I'm sorry ferryman but you cannot lay the blame for that at Grime's door. The PJ had the responsibility of providing premises, transporting the items and laying them out. Grime's job was to deploy the dogs, nothing else. You will be claiming next that he should have driven the cars to the car park too.
According to Amaral, Harrison deemed it necessary that clothing be inspected a second time (in the gym).
The report Harrison wrote air-brushes out involvement of Grime and his dogs in any inspections except those he (Harrison!) recommended (the places Madeleine either had been or, conceivably, might have been).
All very strange ....
-
According to Amaral, Harrison deemed it necessary that clothing be inspected a second time (in the gym).
The report Harrison wrote air-brushes out involvement of Grime and his dogs in any inspections except those he (Harrison!) recommended (the places Madeleine either had been or, conceivably, might have been).
All very strange ....
Why is this all very strange to you ?
-
Why is this all very strange to you ?
If Eddie inspected stuff in place A (without reaction) -- he did, why should it have been deemed necessary to take the same stuff to a different location and test it a second time?
-
If Eddie inspected stuff in place A (without reaction) -- he did, why should it have been deemed necessary to take the same stuff to a different location and test it a second time?
Can you supply actual evidence of that ?
-
According to Amaral, Harrison deemed it necessary that clothing be inspected a second time (in the gym).
The report Harrison wrote air-brushes out involvement of Grime and his dogs in any inspections except those he (Harrison!) recommended (the places Madeleine either had been or, conceivably, might have been).
All very strange ....
Didn't they say something about contamination the first time?
-
Can you supply actual evidence of that ?
Where did the boxes with the clothes packed inside come from? &%+((£
-
Where did the boxes with the clothes packed inside come from? &%+((£
' The searches conducted in the sports hall were not searches where the dog was seeking to locate Madeleine, they were searches of the items taken from the villa '
So you and ferrymans point is ?
-
' The searches conducted in the sports hall were not searches where the dog was seeking to locate Madeleine, they were searches of the items taken from the villa '
So you and ferrymans point is ?
What ???
-
' The searches conducted in the sports hall were not searches where the dog was seeking to locate Madeleine, they were searches of the items taken from the villa '
So you and ferrymans point is ?
What's your point?
Mine is that exactly the same clothing Eddie could find no hint of a scent on when inspected in the villa, he, apparently could, when it was re-inspected (in the gym).
So what was the point (of the second inspection in the gym)?
And why the discrepancy between no reaction in the villa; yet a reaction (in the gym)?
Is it sound dog-handling practise that a dog (actually, two) should trample all over stuff they are tasked to inspect?
Why did Eddie need two stabs at (apparently) reacting to cuddle-cat (after he could find no hint of a scent on a toy he played with, picked up and tossed in the air).
Answers on a postcard ...
-
What's your point?
Mine is that exactly the same clothing Eddie could find no hint of a scent on when inspected in the villa, he, apparently could, when it was re-inspected (in the gym).
So what was the point (of the second inspection in the gym)?
And why the discrepancy between no reaction in the villa; yet a reaction (in the gym)?
Is it sound dog-handling practise that a dog (actually, two) should trample all over stuff they are tasked to inspect?
Why did Eddie need two stabs at (apparently) reacting to cuddle-cat (after he could find no hint of a scent on a toy he played with, picked up and tossed in the air).
Answers on a postcard ...
The only answers you want is to discredit Grime and the dogs.
Hardly surprising though.
-
The only answers you want is to discredit Grime and the dogs.
Hardly surprising though.
I just record (accurately!) what happened.
The rest does itself.
-
I just record (accurately!) what happened.
The rest does itself.
Your posts are selective and contain 'extracts' to suit your agenda.
-
Your posts are selective and contain 'extracts' to suit your agenda.
My posts are an accurate (and complete!) record of what happened.
-
My posts are an accurate (and complete!) record of what happened.
Your posts are your interpretation of what happened.
-
"Is the match genuine of is it a chance match."
A chance match? &%+((£
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2618.jpg)
-
the important FACT is that SY are prepared to accept she is alive ...despite the alerts...SY MUST therefore believe there is an alternative explanation for the alerts
I like the logic here. I wonder if it comes to a conclusion.
-
"Is the match genuine of is it a chance match."
A chance match? &%+((£
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2618.jpg)
I don't see your problem with Lowe's explanation, Pathfinder.
It seems logical to me.
-
I'll answer you if you can tell me how Sean's top gets highly contaminated with cadaver odour?
You have proof of this, do you?
-
You have proof of this, do you?
Shining informed me it was Sean's top, and I've watched the video of Eddie alerting to the top. That was enough for me.
-
Shining informed me it was Sean's top, and I've watched the video of Eddie alerting to the top. That was enough for me.
No Forensics. No Proof.
Please stop jumping to conclusions and assuming that you know better than The Investigation.
-
I don't see your problem with Lowe's explanation, Pathfinder.
It seems logical to me.
The thing I have long found infuriating about all experts (and to be clear, John Lowe is one) is that they just will not commit themselves (unequivocally) to any darned thing.
John Lowe was invited to answer a specific and narrow question (and did so).
He was asked whether the forensic result from the boot of the car advanced knowledge (about whether Madeleine had been transported somewhere dead in the boot of the car); or whether it didn't.
Because it was no part of his brief to, Lowe did not consider wider considerations, such as the idea that hiring a car 3 weeks after Madeleine's abduction and transporting her somewhere dead was plain barking. He didn't, even, consider that the dog-reaction was forensically established and innocent.
He simply considered: from the forensic analysis -- alone -- can we state, certainly, that Madeleine was transported somewhere dead in the car?
Or can we state, certainly, that Madeleine wasn't?
Anwers to both questions: no and no.
From forensic analysis alone it didn't definitively rule out that Madeleine had been taken somewhere dead in the Renault.
And it didn't definitively rule it in.
State of knowledge (about whether Madeleine was taken somewhere dead in the car, or whether she wasn't) exactly the same after the forensic analysis as before.
No advancement (in solving the mystery of what happened to Madeleine) from the forensic analysis.
In that sense, inconclusive.
-
No Forensics. No Proof.
Please stop jumping to conclusions and assuming that you know better than The Investigation.
I think Shining is right that the top was Sean's and not Madeleine's.
-
I'll answer you if you can tell me how Sean's top gets highly contaminated with cadaver odour?
That's the question that we would all like to ask, but did Eddie alert to Cadavar Odour or did he alert to blood? Eddie alerts to blood as well as Cadavar odour
It needed Keela to sniff at it too, to confirm whether it was blood or Cadavar odour. Did she sniff it, or did she not? I cant remember.
If she didn't then the most likely scenario is that it was blood from a living person he was alerting to.
-
That's the question that we would all like to ask, but did Eddie alert to Cadavar Odour or did he alert to blood? Eddie alerts to blood as well as Cadavar odour
It needed Keela to sniff at it too, to confirm whether it was blood or Cadavar odour. Did she sniff it, or did she not? I cant remember.
If she didn't then the most likely scenario is that it was blood from a living person he was alerting to.
No sadie thats wrong
Eddie alerted to the t shirt
Keela didnt
Ergo no blood on it
-
No sadie thats wrong
Eddie alerted to the t shirt
Keela didnt
Ergo no blood on it
But was it presented to Keela? By which I mean did they take keela to sniff at all the clothes?
And had anyone been eating a bacon sarnie?
Anyway it was S**ns tee-shirt, not Madeleines. Too small for Madeleine.
-
That's the question that we would all like to ask, but did Eddie alert to Cadavar Odour or did he alert to blood? Eddie alerts to blood as well as Cadavar odour
It needed Keela to sniff at it too, to confirm whether it was blood or Cadavar odour. Did she sniff it, or did she not? I cant remember.
If she didn't then the most likely scenario is that it was blood from a living person he was alerting to.
Eddie only alerted to cadaver odour, so if he appears to alert to blood it is because the blood has decomposed prior to him scenting it. You don't need a whole cadaver to get cadaver odour, body parts and tissues will give the same results.
Keela sniffs for dried fresh human blood.
-
But was it presented to Keela? By which I mean did they take keela to sniff at all the clothes?
And had anyone been eating a bacon sarnie?
Anyway it was S**ns tee-shirt, not Madeleines. Too small for Madeleine.
What height range and age range does it say on the label Sadie?
-
What height range and age range does it say on the label Sadie?
Is there a photo clear enough to read that sort of information?
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id161.html
02 August 2007
Gerry McCann cancels trip to Huelva due to 'viral illness'.
Around 18:00pm, the Inspectors knock on the door of the McCanns villa. Jon Corner states in the Panorama documentary that the McCanns were forewarned of this forensic visit and that there were clothes in the washing machine when the Inspectors arrived.
Cadaver odour is indicated on two pieces of Kate's clothing (trousers and blouse), on a red T-shirt believed to belong to Madeleine and on the soft toy known as 'Cuddle Cat'.
-
here is a photo of Sean wearing the red top.
-
We still need some scenario that would get Sean's red "T" shirt covered in cadaver odour?
-
What height range and age range does it say on the label Sadie?
No idea, but it clearly is too small for Madeleine .... and also not the pink colour or pale pretty colour that she always seemed to wear. It is boys stuff.
-
No idea, but it clearly is too small for Madeleine .... and also not the pink colour or pale pretty colour that she always seemed to wear. It is boys stuff.
Madeleine was wearing clothes for girls in the 2-3 year age range (i.e. under 4) and her pyjamas were for someone 97cm in height.
Sean was wearing clothes for boys in the 2-3 year age range (i.e. under 4) and the one item of clothing I have seen attributed to him was for boys up to 98cm in height.
So the red airplane top should have fitted Madeleine, but who cares? It is a boy's top, and the photo of Sean wearing it is not the one I remember, so if my memory is correct, that makes two occasions with Sean wearing Sean's top, after Madeleine had disappeared.
-
Madeleine was wearing clothes for girls in the 2-3 year age range (i.e. under 4) and her pyjamas were for someone 97cm in height.
Sean was wearing clothes for boys in the 2-3 year age range (i.e. under 4) and the one item of clothing I have seen attributed to him was for boys up to 98cm in height.
So the red airplane top should have fitted Madeleine, but who cares? It is a boy's top, and the photo of Sean wearing it is not the one I remember, so if my memory is correct, that makes two occasions with Sean wearing Sean's top, after Madeleine had disappeared.
Madeleine was clearly taller than Sean. And also, despite having slim limbs, she had a fairly robust body. I think she had Healey limbs and Mccann body style.
-
No idea, but it clearly is too small for Madeleine .... and also not the pink colour or pale pretty colour that she always seemed to wear. It is boys stuff.
Boys stuff like this top?
(http://i1.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article4675808.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/Madeleine-McCann.jpg)
-
Madeleine was wearing clothes for girls in the 2-3 year age range (i.e. under 4) and her pyjamas were for someone 97cm in height.
Sean was wearing clothes for boys in the 2-3 year age range (i.e. under 4) and the one item of clothing I have seen attributed to him was for boys up to 98cm in height.
So the red airplane top should have fitted Madeleine, but who cares? It is a boy's top, and the photo of Sean wearing it is not the one I remember, so if my memory is correct, that makes two occasions with Sean wearing Sean's top, after Madeleine had disappeared.
So how would it get covered in cadaver odour? With him wearing it a lot. There must be a solution here somewhere. Assuming the PJ didn't just take it to the local morgue and rub cadaver odour into it, what move did the McCanns make to get cadaver odour over Sean's top?
-
So how would it get covered in cadaver odour? With him wearing it a lot. There must be a solution here somewhere. Assuming the PJ didn't just take it to the local morgue and rub cadaver odour into it, what move did the McCanns make to get cadaver odour over Sean's top?
There are 2 big clues in the Eddie & Keela video as to how the shirt could have been contaminated.
-
But was it presented to Keela? By which I mean did they take keela to sniff at all the clothes?
And had anyone been eating a bacon sarnie?
Anyway it was S**ns tee-shirt, not Madeleines. Too small for Madeleine.
Yes, all the clothes in the line up were presented to keela after eddie made his alerts (posted on the cuddle cat thread too)
Bacon sarnies do not come into it, ref Mr Grime
'Eddie, the dog with an advanced training to detect mortal victims (E.V.R.D.), searches and locates human remains and body fluids, including blood, in any environment or terrain. The initial training of the dog was done with human blood and decaying piglets that were born dead. The importance of this training is that the dog learnt to identify the odour of a decaying body that is not food. This guaranties that the dog ignores the 'bacon sandwich' and the 'kebab', etc. that are always present in the environment. Besides that the dog will not alert to a meal prepared at home or on any other place. For instance, the dog will be efficient on searching a cadaver in café where the clients can be seated eating a bacon sandwich. As a complement of this training, the dog receives an additional training in the USA, in association with the FBI, in which will be used exclusively human remains' (sic) (page 2493 and 2494).
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANALYSIS-11-VOLUMES.htm
-
Yes, all the clothes in the line up were presented to keela after eddie made his alerts (posted on the cuddle cat thread too)
Bacon sarnies do not come into it, ref Mr Grime
'Eddie, the dog with an advanced training to detect mortal victims (E.V.R.D.), searches and locates human remains and body fluids, including blood, in any environment or terrain. The initial training of the dog was done with human blood and decaying piglets that were born dead. The importance of this training is that the dog learnt to identify the odour of a decaying body that is not food. This guaranties that the dog ignores the 'bacon sandwich' and the 'kebab', etc. that are always present in the environment. Besides that the dog will not alert to a meal prepared at home or on any other place. For instance, the dog will be efficient on searching a cadaver in café where the clients can be seated eating a bacon sandwich. As a complement of this training, the dog receives an additional training in the USA, in association with the FBI, in which will be used exclusively human remains' (sic) (page 2493 and 2494).
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANALYSIS-11-VOLUMES.htm
Don't think so, Merc. It seems that in the clothes inspection, unusually, Keela was wheeled in first, then Eddie.
1 - 11.20pm: Prior reconnaissance of the place by the two canine units to guarantee that the space was clear of all odours being sought. The reconnaissance was completed at 11.30pm without anything being signalled by the dogs.
2 - 11.30pm: An initial inspection by the human blood detecting dog, began with the clothing packed in the box bearing the notation: "Living room." At 11.40pm, the inspection was completed without the dog showing anything abnormal.
11.41: The canine human remains recovery dog started its inspection and "marked" various clothes. The inspection was completed at 11.52pm. The clothes were returned to their box for later use.
From 12.02am until 1.30am, (03/08/07) all the other boxes, containing clothing from the twins' bedroom, from the friends' bedroom, from the bedroom of the couple labelled 1 & 2, as well as the empty luggage, was inspected by the two dogs without conclusive results.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/INSPECTION_SITES.htm
-
Thats not the normal way around Carana Mr Grime tells us, so something went wrong in the recording of events imo or something else?
Why would the blood dog be sent in first? might be some reason we dont know of if the timings really are correct.odd.
In any case, the point was, that keela was shown the items eddie alerted to....sadie asserted the opposite so was just replying to that
-
Keela goes in first to rule out blood on clothing. So if Eddie alerts next it's not for blood. Elementary.
-
Don't think so, Merc. It seems that in the clothes inspection, unusually, Keela was wheeled in first, then Eddie.
1 - 11.20pm: Prior reconnaissance of the place by the two canine units to guarantee that the space was clear of all odours being sought. The reconnaissance was completed at 11.30pm without anything being signalled by the dogs.
2 - 11.30pm: An initial inspection by the human blood detecting dog, began with the clothing packed in the box bearing the notation: "Living room." At 11.40pm, the inspection was completed without the dog showing anything abnormal.
11.41: The canine human remains recovery dog started its inspection and "marked" various clothes. The inspection was completed at 11.52pm. The clothes were returned to their box for later use.
From 12.02am until 1.30am, (03/08/07) all the other boxes, containing clothing from the twins' bedroom, from the friends' bedroom, from the bedroom of the couple labelled 1 & 2, as well as the empty luggage, was inspected by the two dogs without conclusive results.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/INSPECTION_SITES.htm
The text you quote doesn't appear in the file you link to. Eventually found something similar:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/INSPECTION_SITES.htm
2. Between 23h30 and 23h40 items from the box labelled 'common room' were inspected by the blood dog without result.
- At 23h41 the cadaver dog began its inspection and 'marked' some clothing on the edge of the area. The inspection ended at 23h52 with the clothing having been collected for later direct examination and photographic report.
Now in the video I watched there was no filming of Keela (Blood dog) doing her check.
The clothes are laid out and Eddie immediately does his check. Because parts of the video is missing other things could have happened to the items. IMO the whole thing is a ruse.
-
Keela goes in first to rule out blood on clothing. So if Eddie alerts next it's not for blood. Elementary.
There is no logic in that Sherlock!
-
Keela goes in first to rule out blood on clothing. So if Eddie alerts next it's not for blood. Elementary.
Put like that seems it could work the other way seeing as keela was concentrating on specific items and not a whole apartment?
What about this? Does this mean keela is sent in anyway despite an initial sweep by the cadaver dogs?
Ie gym was not a crime scene, or am I getting it all confused?
Fact is Grime can explain all this, I wonder if he will ever get the chance to
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id157.html
3rd entry on the page
When faced with a "clean" crime scene, Mr Ellis and PC Martin Grimes, Keela's other handler, will first send in Frankie, a border collie, and Eddie, another springer spaniel, to pick up any general scent. Then they wheel in the big gun.
"We take Keela in and she will find the minutest traces of blood," Mr Ellis said. "It's not like looking for a needle in a haystack any more. The other two dogs will find the haystack and Keela will find the needle."
-
Thats not the normal way around Carana Mr Grime tells us, so something went wrong in the recording of events imo or something else?
Why would the blood dog be sent in first? might be some reason we dont know of if the timings really are correct.odd.
In any case, the point was, that keela was shown the items eddie alerted to....sadie asserted the opposite so was just replying to that
I don't know. Was this report wrong? Was there a reason to wheel in Keela first? There might have been, as it wouldn't be that unusual to find a speck of blood on clothes for one reason or another.
I'm still intrigued by the fact that aside from one pair of knickers, there weren't any other under garments in the line-up.
I know that you don't agree with my suspicion that Eddie could probably react to more human substances than just a dead body or dried blood, but I happen to find that a bit odd. Didn't the police find any other underwear in that entire raid inspection? Or did they, and they were set apart and the one pair of knickers was a mistake?
-
If you read further, you'll see that Grime admitted - in his rogatory statement - that Eddie would react to dried blood from a LIVING human being. This doesn't appear to have been made clear in his promo CV.
The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver'
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
-
Put like that seems it could work the other way seeing as keela was concentrating on specific items and not a whole apartment?
What about this? Does this mean keela is sent in anyway despite an initial sweep by the cadaver dogs?
Ie gym was not a crime scene, or am I getting it all confused?
Fact is Grime can explain all this, I wonder if he will ever get the chance to
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id157.html
3rd entry on the page
When faced with a "clean" crime scene, Mr Ellis and PC Martin Grimes, Keela's other handler, will first send in Frankie, a border collie, and Eddie, another springer spaniel, to pick up any general scent. Then they wheel in the big gun.
"We take Keela in and she will find the minutest traces of blood," Mr Ellis said. "It's not like looking for a needle in a haystack any more. The other two dogs will find the haystack and Keela will find the needle."
I agree, Merc, that normally Eddie went in first (he was the wide spectrum four-legged chappy) and Keela got wheeled in if he alerted (to zoom in).
That doesn't appear to have the sequence in the clothes line-up. But then nothing about that makes much sense to me. For some reason, Grime didn't have a list of the items that Eddie reacted to - that was left to the PJ to provide. And I can't find any logic in what was deemed to be an alert or not. IMO, the clothes episode was a mess.
-
I don't know. Was this report wrong? Was there a reason to wheel in Keela first? There might have been, as it wouldn't be that unusual to find a speck of blood on clothes for one reason or another.
I'm still intrigued by the fact that aside from one pair of knickers, there weren't any other under garments in the line-up.
I know that you don't agree with my suspicion that Eddie could probably react to more human substances than just a dead body or dried blood, but I happen to find that a bit odd. Didn't the police find any other underwear in that entire raid inspection? Or did they, and they were set apart and the one pair of knickers was a mistake?
We are cross posting
Anyway
Not at all, if Grime says sperm was within eddies parameters it was whether it was that that he found alone or in an and/or way or not in jersey
Im not aufait with all the items in the mccann line up, never watched that intensely throughout
?
-
I agree, Merc, that normally Eddie went in first (he was the wide spectrum four-legged chappy) and Keela got wheeled in if he alerted (to zoom in).
That doesn't appear to have the sequence in the clothes line-up. But then nothing about that makes much sense to me. For some reason, Grime didn't have a list of the items that Eddie reacted to - that was left to the PJ to provide. And I can't find any logic in what was deemed to be an alert or not. IMO, the clothes episode was a mess.
Maybe Keela went in first at the gym because Eddie had already been around the clothes at the villa?
-
Keela ruled out blood on the clothes (why they are screened separately) and then Eddie came next and alerted. Both dogs screened the gym before any clothes were laid out.
'With respect to the cadaver odour on Kate's clothes, could it be undoubtedly affirmed that those clothes had been in contact with a cadaver'
OR
Could the alert have been given because the clothes had been in contact with other items of clothing, surfaces or objects that could previously have touched a cadaver, thereby allowing the odour to be transferred''
There is always a possibility of contamination of odours by transferral. EVRD does not make a distinction; he responds with a certain behaviour for which he was trained when he recognizes an odour. He does not identify the reasons for the presence of the odour nor does he identify suspects. Forensic confirmation and specialized investigation methods will determine the reasons and the suspicions. In order to undoubtedly affirm there must be a confirmation of the alert signals made by the dog.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
-
If you read further, you'll see that Grime admitted - in his rogatory statement - that Eddie would react to dried blood from a LIVING human being. This doesn't appear to have been made clear in his promo CV.
The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver'
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
That is because taking blood does not kill you. For example You get a blood sample taken at the medical lab take the top off it for a week and let it rot, take a drop of that and let it dry. So Eddie will alert to that dried blood but you will definitely be still alive and well.
-
We are cross posting
Anyway
Not at all, if Grime says sperm was within eddies parameters it was whether it was that that he found alone or in an and/or way or not in jersey
Im not aufait with all the items in the mccann line up, never watched that intensely throughout
?
I've watched it, Merc. More than once. Excruciatingly long and bewildering. Eddie didn't react in the same way to some items that made the PJ list, yet items that he reacted to in the same ways didn't make the list. I really can't work it out.
And I'm still intrigued about the lack of underwear... ;)
-
Keela
'How long can a trace of blood remain at a scene and be detected by the CSI dog''
During both training and operations, the CSI dog correctly located and signalled the presence of blood from 1960. This is not at all surprising. If enough blood is present so that the dog can recognize its odour, he will locate it and alert to its presence. There is no time restriction as regards the recognition of the odour by the dog. Blood, however, is subject to deterioration such as time and other natural processes such as dilution due to rain and other reactive chemical agents.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
-
That is because taking blood does not kill you. For example You get a blood sample taken at the medical lab take the top off it for a week and let it rot, take a drop of that and let it dry. So Eddie will alert to that dried blood but you will definitely be still alive and well.
Yes.
I find Grime a bit misleading when he mentions "cadaver" odour. If it was a short form meaning the scent of decomposing substances originating from a human (dead or alive), then it might have been clearer and we might not have 10,000 dog threads on here.
-
I don't know. Was this report wrong? Was there a reason to wheel in Keela first? There might have been, as it wouldn't be that unusual to find a speck of blood on clothes for one reason or another.
I'm still intrigued by the fact that aside from one pair of knickers, there weren't any other under garments in the line-up.
I know that you don't agree with my suspicion that Eddie could probably react to more human substances than just a dead body or dried blood, but I happen to find that a bit odd. Didn't the police find any other underwear in that entire raid inspection? Or did they, and they were set apart and the one pair of knickers was a mistake?
It would be sensible not to include items that could possibly cause false alerts eg undies and knickers.
-
I've watched it, Merc. More than once. Excrutiatingly long and bewildering. Eddie didn't react in the same way to some items that made the PJ list, yet items that he reacted to in the same ways didn't make the list. I really can't work it out.
And I'm still intrigued about the lack of underwear... ;)
Dogs are not robots
Excruciating? Im glad it was, needs to be very thorough if a childs death is suspected and the UKs police authorities recommend theybe sent in
What underwear? Why should there be loads of underwear? Whose underwear was there and whe was missing. Not following.
-
Yes.
I find Grime a bit misleading when he mentions "cadaver" odour. If it was a short form meaning the scent of decomposing substances originating from a human (dead or alive), then it might have been clearer and we might not have 10,000 dog threads on here.
That is the E in Eddie's name i.e. Enhanced training in detecting cadaver odour - EVRD.
-
It would be sensible not to include items that could possibly cause false alerts eg undies and knickers.
Why exclude them if he only reacted to cadavers?
-
That is the E in Eddie's name i.e. Enhanced training in detecting cadaver odour - EVRD.
I'm not aware of other UK dogs at the time with this "enhanced" status. Was this added as a result of an alleged visit to the Body Farm?
-
It would be sensible not to include items that could possibly cause false alerts eg undies and knickers.
If he only alerted to cadavers, then why exclude underwear?
We - now - know that he would also alert to dried blood from a living human being, but there is no mention of Keela having reacted to any of the clothes.
Was the underwear not collected? Where was the underwear in relation to the rest of the clothes? Or was it stuffed in the same box and sorted prior to the filmed gym episode?
Was clean and potentially dirty laundry stuffed together or boxed separately?
-
From what I can gather, I find it quite possible that Eddie went on a trip to the US. However, I haven't found any confirmation of it.
-
Why exclude them if he only reacted to cadavers?
You are not reading and understanding what I'm saying. Menstrual blood on a pair of knickers could produce an alert by both the cadaver dog and the blood dog yet the person who menstruated could be standing right beside Eddie and Keela. So to eliminate false positives they would not test knickers as a matter of choice.
-
For those who've followed Eddie's career, had he ever been tasked with checking clothes before? If so, in which case and what were the supporting forensic results?
-
Grime says he went to the usa and trained his dog onn human corpses
-
You are not reading and understanding what I'm saying. Menstrual blood on a pair of knickers could produce an alert by both the cadaver dog and the blood dog yet the person who menstruated could be standing right beside Eddie and Keela. So to eliminate false positives they would not test knickers as a matter of choice.
Sorry, I'm not following at the moment.
Who exactly could have been menstruating whilst standing next to Eddie and Keela?
And why would any such person only be near underwear?
-
Sorry, I'm not following at the moment.
Who exactly could have been menstruating whilst standing next to Eddie and Keela?
And why would any such person only be near underwear?
Id make a nice cup of coco sit back and hit ignore
-
Grime says he went to the usa and trained his dog onn human corpses
I've found articles in which Keela was supposed to go (dating from late 2006, from memory). So I see no reason why he wouldn't have taken the opportunity to take Eddie as well and let him have a sniff around the Body Farm.
I have no reason to doubt that Eddie did go, simply I haven't found any confirmation of it.
-
I agree, Merc, that normally Eddie went in first (he was the wide spectrum four-legged chappy) and Keela got wheeled in if he alerted (to zoom in).
That doesn't appear to have the sequence in the clothes line-up. But then nothing about that makes much sense to me. For some reason, Grime didn't have a list of the items that Eddie reacted to - that was left to the PJ to provide. And I can't find any logic in what was deemed to be an alert or not. IMO, the clothes episode was a mess.
I agree. The main point of interest IMO is Grime's observation that the clothes alerted to all came out of the same box. Some co-incidence that!
-
Sorry, I'm not following at the moment.
Who exactly could have been menstruating whilst standing next to Eddie and Keela?
And why would any such person only be near underwear?
I'm sure underwear would cause false alerts.
-
I've found articles in which Keela was supposed to go (dating from late 2006, from memory). So I see no reason why he wouldn't have taken the opportunity to take Eddie as well and let him have a sniff around the Body Farm.
I have no reason to doubt that Eddie did go, simply I haven't found any confirmation of it.
Gurgle.
There are heaps of reasons.
Not least that Eddie, at the time, would have been 5 or 6 and 18 months from retirement as a police dog.
And we (in England) don't use human remains to train dogs because we regard it as unethical. Why (on earth) would we (in England) indulge both the expense and hypocrisy of sending dogs to America to be trained in ways outlawed as unethical in England?
And especially 18 months from retirement.
Grime went to America [ deleted ] to discuss Keela, in whom the Americans had taken an interest.
The contemporaneous press reports of that (then forthcoming) visit say Keela went to America to assist the FBI in two murder enquiries.
Those reports say nothing about Eddie (then unknown outside police circles.)
-
I agree. The main point of interest IMO is Grime's observation that the clothes alerted to all came out of the same box. Some co-incidence that!
Don't get me started.
This was exactly the same clothing that, in the villa, Eddie could find no hint of a trace of an odour on.
Yet all those items were scooped up, bundled into bog-standard cardboard boxes (with zero regard to principles of cross-contamination, not that that mattered) and laid out a (second) time (in a different place), trampled all over (by both dogs) and one picked stuff up in his mouth and barked.
Hey-presto.
The lie of 'death-scent on Kate's clothes' was born.
Oh, and on Sean's tee-shirt.
-
Following the search effected at Rua das Flores, 27, during which certain items were seized, this present inspection was performed, in a place appropriated for its purpose, [the gym] attempting to identify particular pieces of clothing possibly indicated by the dogs, namely Eddy [that] indicates cadaver odours and Kila [that] indicates blood odours.
-
I'm sure underwear would cause false alerts.
Keela was directed to search the master bedroom, and found no traces of blood other than a drawer containing women’s underwear. Grime noted that isn’t uncommon because of the scent of menstrual blood.
http://loudounnow.com/2016/06/02/day-9-of-castillo-murder-trial-hones-in-on-phone-records/
-
Keela was directed to search the master bedroom, and found no traces of blood other than a drawer containing women’s underwear. Grime noted that isn’t uncommon because of the scent of menstrual blood.
http://loudounnow.com/2016/06/02/day-9-of-castillo-murder-trial-hones-in-on-phone-records/
Yes and if they were not laundered rapidly I'd even imagine you could get the cadaver dog to alert.
-
Gurgle.
There are heaps of reasons.
Not least that Eddie, at the time, would have been 5 or 6 and 18 months from retirement as a police dog.
And we (in England) don't use human remains to train dogs because we regard it as unethical. Why (on earth) would we (in England) indulge both the expense and hypocrisy of sending dogs to America to be trained in ways outlawed as unethical in England?
And especially 18 months from retirement.
Grime went to America [ deleted ] to discuss Keela, in whom the Americans had taken an interest.
The contemporaneous press reports of that (then forthcoming) visit say Keela went to America to assist the FBI in two murder enquiries.
Those reports say nothing about Eddie (then unknown outside police circles.)
I know we disagree as to whether he took Eddie or not, FM. ;)
-
I'm sure underwear would cause false alerts.
Not just female undies, then?
-
If you can be bothered to watch the video, the first item he gets all excited about is a tiny pair of blue shorts (before the red t-shirt).
For some strange reason, that didn't make the PJ's list.
-
Not just female undies, then?
I didn't mean to be sexist, but I had discussed it with my female friend had it seemed possible to her. So yes, I would think this is the reason they left the underwear out of these searches. But it still doesn't explain why some items were alerted on.
-
If you can be bothered to watch the video, the first item he gets all excited about is a tiny pair of blue shorts (before the red t-shirt).
For some strange reason, that didn't make the PJ's list.
I took that just to be air currents.
-
Don't get me started.
This was exactly the same clothing that, in the villa, Eddie could find no hint of a trace of an odour on.
Yet all those items were scooped up, bundled into bog-standard cardboard boxes (with zero regard to principles of cross-contamination, not that that mattered) and laid out a (second) time (in a different place), trampled all over (by both dogs) and one picked stuff up in his mouth and barked.
Hey-presto.
The lie of 'death-scent on Kate's clothes' was born.
Oh, and on Sean's tee-shirt.
IIRC it was claimed in the first instance that the tee-shirt belonged to Madeleine. From memory but I'm sure I've seen that claim made in statements listing the places/articles alerted to.
One cannot help seeing how very 'convenient' that would have been to Amarals theory - if it was true.
I'm not sure whether that claim was every officially retracted. If it was - I've missed it.
(must go out now)
-
IIRC it was claimed in the first instance that the tee-shirt belonged to Madeleine. From memory but I'm sure I've seen that claim made in statements listing the places/articles alerted to.
One cannot help seeing how very 'convenient' that would have been to Amarals theory - if it was true.
I'm not sure whether that claim was every officially retracted. If it was - I've missed it.
(must go out now)
If they claimed to Kate that they found cadaver odour on Madeleine's top she would have immediately noted how wrong they were. She must have known things weren't right when they told her that?
-
Keela was directed to search the master bedroom, and found no traces of blood other than a drawer containing women’s underwear. Grime noted that isn’t uncommon because of the scent of menstrual blood.
http://loudounnow.com/2016/06/02/day-9-of-castillo-murder-trial-hones-in-on-phone-records/
???
'Taking into account the signals of CSI, could the dog alert to other biological fluids''
The dog that alerts to human blood is trained exclusively for this purpose, and includes its components, plasma, red cells, white cells and platelets. Given the nature of the training, the dog will not alert to urine, saliva, semen sweat, nasal secretion, vaginal secretion or human skin unless these are mixed with blood. The components of blood are approximately:
Red cells 40-50%
-
Keela was directed to search the master bedroom, and found no traces of blood other than a drawer containing women’s underwear. Grime noted that isn’t uncommon because of the scent of menstrual blood.
http://loudounnow.com/2016/06/02/day-9-of-castillo-murder-trial-hones-in-on-phone-records/
Interesting.
Morse also reacted in the bedroom as noted by Martin Grime.
“As soon as the dog entered the bedroom, he exhibited behavioural changes.”
http://loudounnow.com/2016/06/02/day-9-of-castillo-murder-trial-hones-in-on-phone-records/
There are stringent rules re independent testing which allows dogs' evidence to be presented in American courts which Morse met and indeed exceeded.
**snip
At trial, FBI Canine Program Manager Rex Stockham testified as an expert in forensic canine operation. Stockham testified about the process of training and testing victim recovery dogs. Stockham's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time handlers in its program, including Martin Grime. Stockham testified that he had tested Morse and Keela, Grime's dogs, and that both dogs had accuracy ratings in the high 90 percent range. Stockham testified that dogs have been able to smell the odor of decomposition as soon as 2 hours after a victim's death, or years after a victim's burial.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html
According to Martin Grime, Keela alerted only to blood. However, Eddie's training encompassed a wider spectrum of decomposition including human blood.
**snip
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.
**snip
The dogs do not get confused. They transmit a behavioural response inspired by the recognition of the odour for which they were trained.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
According to the handler it isn't considered unusual for the dog trained only to alert to blood to alert as in this case to a knicker drawer. I would presume the underwear therein had been laundered but was contaminated still, although not visible to the human eye or nose.
Why would it be strange or unusual for the VRD to react to scents it was trained to recognise?
Particularly in bedrooms where it would be possible for areas to be contaminated by bodily secretions such as semen to be recognised by the VRD but which is outside the parameters of the CSI trained only to blood.
-
No blood alert on the clothes so what do you think Eddie alerted to.......Persil?
Last night I re-watched the video of the dogs checking the clothes.
Keela was only shown the first few clothes and the last few shoes and clothes.
Keela did NOT check the red tee-shirt. She needed to do that in order for Eddies alert to point to cadavar Odour.
Therefore the most likely scenario is that Eddie alerted to blood.
-
Last night I re-watched the video of the dogs checking the clothes.
Keela was only shown the first few clothes and the last few shoes and clothes.
Keela did NOT check the red tee-shirt. She needed to do that in order for Eddies alert to point to cadavar Odour.
Therefore the most likely scenario is that Eddie alerted to blood.
I agree you are correct in you two observations but I still think your conclusion is wrong. For it was a very typical response of Eddie to cadaver odour.
-
I agree you are correct in you two observations but I still think your conclusion is wrong. For it was a very typical response of Eddie to cadaver odour.
What you think of as cadaver odour may not necessarily be what Eddie recognised as cadaver odour. Like all VRD, Eddie had a wide repertoire of of scents which may have triggered his trained response. Many of which emanate from human sources which are very much alive and well. Which is why the responses are only taken as an indication of cadaver scent and must be verified by other means than reliance on the dog's nose.
If the CSI is capable of detecting menstrual blood in an underwear drawer the VRD with no less an educated nose is surely capable of detecting that and other traces that Keela had been trained to ignore.
In my opinion that entirely rules out the alleged checks and balances which enabled the elimination strategy consisting of equating Keela's lack of response to an area alerted to by the VRD to be indicative solely of death.
The notion that the alert in the corner of the McCann bedroom could only have been cadaver odour is thus rendered null and void.
It meant nothing that Keela did not alert.
It also makes sense of Carana's misgivings that no knickers were evident in the clothing taken to the gymnasium.
The significance of the 'knicker drawer' was little understood by non professionals on internet forums or it seems the PJ who ruined Madeleine's parents' reputation based on what they thought Eddie's barking in the corner of the bedroom indicated.
-
What you think of as cadaver odour may not necessarily be what Eddie recognised as cadaver odour. Like all VRD, Eddie had a wide repertoire of of scents which may have triggered his trained response. Many of which emanate from human sources which are very much alive and well. Which is why the responses are only taken as an indication of cadaver scent and must be verified by other means than reliance on the dog's nose.
If the CSI is capable of detecting menstrual blood in an underwear drawer the VRD with no less an educated nose is surely capable of detecting that and other traces that Keela had been trained to ignore.
In my opinion that entirely rules out the alleged checks and balances which enabled the elimination strategy consisting of equating Keela's lack of response to an area alerted to by the VRD to be indicative solely of death.
The notion that the alert in the corner of the McCann bedroom could only have been cadaver odour is thus rendered null and void.
It meant nothing that Keela did not alert.
It also makes sense of Carana's misgivings that no knickers were evident in the clothing taken to the gymnasium.
The significance of the 'knicker drawer' was little understood by non professionals on internet forums or it seems the PJ who ruined Madeleine's parents' reputation based on what they thought Eddie's barking in the corner of the bedroom indicated.
Are you saying a pair of knickers could be the cause of the confusion in the main bedroom too. Well that is possible too now that you mention it. But it seems unlikely for there will be a significant difference between the knickers being present and just where a pair of knickers had been lying, considering the time span in between the events. We are back into the unknown again.
-
Interesting.
Morse also reacted in the bedroom as noted by Martin Grime.
“As soon as the dog entered the bedroom, he exhibited behavioural changes.”
http://loudounnow.com/2016/06/02/day-9-of-castillo-murder-trial-hones-in-on-phone-records/
There are stringent rules re independent testing which allows dogs' evidence to be presented in American courts which Morse met and indeed exceeded.
**snip
At trial, FBI Canine Program Manager Rex Stockham testified as an expert in forensic canine operation. Stockham testified about the process of training and testing victim recovery dogs. Stockham's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time handlers in its program, including Martin Grime. Stockham testified that he had tested Morse and Keela, Grime's dogs, and that both dogs had accuracy ratings in the high 90 percent range. Stockham testified that dogs have been able to smell the odor of decomposition as soon as 2 hours after a victim's death, or years after a victim's burial.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html
According to Martin Grime, Keela alerted only to blood. However, Eddie's training encompassed a wider spectrum of decomposition including human blood.
**snip
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.
**snip
The dogs do not get confused. They transmit a behavioural response inspired by the recognition of the odour for which they were trained.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
According to the handler it isn't considered unusual for the dog trained only to alert to blood to alert as in this case to a knicker drawer. I would presume the underwear therein had been laundered but was contaminated still, although not visible to the human eye or nose.
Why would it be strange or unusual for the VRD to react to scents it was trained to recognise?
Particularly in bedrooms where it would be possible for areas to be contaminated by bodily secretions such as semen to be recognised by the VRD but which is outside the parameters of the CSI trained only to blood.
See you are twisting things again. Morse behaviour changed entering that bedroom for cadaver odour according to the experts not knickers in a draw.
"Stockham and Grime said Morse detected two areas of human decomposition, near the bathtub in the bathroom of the basement, where Michelle’s body was found, and the carpet at the foot of the bed in the master bedroom."
-
See you are twisting things again. Morse behaviour changed entering that bedroom for cadaver odour according to the experts not knickers in a draw.
"Stockham and Grime said Morse detected two areas of human decomposition, near the bathtub in the bathroom of the basement, where Michelle’s body was found, and the carpet at the foot of the bed in the master bedroom."
Hmmmm ... how do you know what Morse was scenting? ... underwear in a drawer? temporary deposition on the rug? ... transferance? The handlers couldn't deny the latter when asked. They weren't asked about the underwear drawer.
The defence argued that in the bedroom the dog could have alerted to scent which ... "may have been transferred by investigators, a possibility to which the handlers did not deny."
http://loudounnow.com/2016/06/02/day-9-of-castillo-murder-trial-hones-in-on-phone-records/
How do you know whether or not use of another VRD would have given the same result?
Any idea if Stockham and Grime's assertions were backed up by usual police and scientific procedure when the indication given by the dog is subject to forensic testing to ascertain what substances, if any, are present in the area of the alert.
The Michelle's remains were not being looked for. Evidence either to back up or refute that Michelle had been murdered in a location different to that where her remains were found was being sought.
Do you know how much weight the jury gave to the handlers' evidence when reaching their verdict?
-
Last night I re-watched the video of the dogs checking the clothes.
Keela was only shown the first few clothes and the last few shoes and clothes.
Keela did NOT check the red tee-shirt. She needed to do that in order for Eddies alert to point to cadavar Odour.
Therefore the most likely scenario is that Eddie alerted to blood.
You dont know that keela and eddie did not get exercised on the same clothes, as I already said yesterday, the video is incomplete
The reports state keela did not react to any clothes
They say eddie did
What would be the point of not having both dogs scent the same clothes
So your conclusion ie the most likely scenario is eddie alerted to blood is wrong
A) because its speculation
B) if keela did scent the tshirt or trousers or white top then it could have been dried blood or cadaver scent...one dogs alert parameters doesnt cancel out the others
C) no clothes were sent to forensics, so no blood scented
D) if its true keela was sent in first and made no alert, its not possible eddie alerted to blood
Yes its comlicated, so i think its best no layman here makes any assertions
-
Are you saying a pair of knickers could be the cause of the confusion in the main bedroom too. Well that is possible too now that you mention it. But it seems unlikely for there will be a significant difference between the knickers being present and just where a pair of knickers had been lying, considering the time span in between the events. We are back into the unknown again.
Rob, don't forget that the flat had been let out up until a few days before the dog inspection.
- Apartment 5A was subsequently let between 12 and 19 June (to friends of the owner); 28 June to 12 July (to three people with Irish names); 12 to 19 July (to an English couple) and 19 to 26 July (to a family with Southern Asian names).
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DCCB_LETTER.htm
But it isn't clear who else had been in it between the last lot of holidaymakers and the dogs. Had it been cleaned since they left or not?
Inspection of the apartments.
Date: July 31st 2007 - 8pm. Report:
Participants:
PJ: Tavares A. & Ricardo P. Inspectors
UK: Mark Harrison, Martin Grime (UK Forensic Canine P SM Expert),
Eddie & Keela (English Springers)
Silvia B. Manager of the Ocean Club complex.
On that date, inspections were conducted in the apartments occupied by members of the McCann family as well as the group who were with them at the time of Madeleine McCann's disappearance. It was only on that date that the apartment, identified as that of the parents, was empty allowing further investigation which was authorised by the respective occupants. Thus, at the appointed time, the search with the dogs began, covering the following apartments:
5A:
From 8.30pm to 9.20pm, the dogs go through. (...)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EDDIE-KEELA.htm
(The latter was translated via French and I haven't found the original in PT yet.)
-
Thank you Carana I read through both those reports.
-
Thank you Carana I read through both those reports.
My point is still the same.
I don't see how her potential death in 5a can be formally excluded (it's not as if there had been any form of irrefutable evidence of her subsequent live presence elsewhere). But nor is there any evidence - beyond a dog barking for reasons best known to himself - that she is dead, whether that happened in the flat or anywhere else.
At the same time, the dog could have been correctly reacting to a lingering smell of a totally irrelevant nature from previous occupants dating back to only a few days prior, after which it may have been locked and not cleaned pending the inspection, or it's possible that a cleaner or other member of staff had just checked briefly to remove any items from the previous occupants or their rubbish. And not everyone can be bothered to do laundry when on vacation.
It's also possible that Eddie felt under pressure and was doing his best by reacting to components of what he was trained for (VRDs have reacted to methane in peat bogs before now, for example).
What I disagree with is the assumption that he was NECESSARILY reacting to the prior direct presence of a deceased person, and even less with the idea that it had to be this missing child.
-
My point is still the same.
I don't see how her potential death in 5a can be formally excluded (it's not as if there had been any form of irrefutable evidence of her subsequent live presence elsewhere). But nor is there any evidence - beyond a dog barking for reasons best known to himself - that she is dead, whether that happened in the flat or anywhere else.
....
Only if you don't accept that Smithman could have been carrying a sleeping Madeleine, and if you reject the Ibiza airport sighting as a positive sighting of MM with the two orphanage collectors wanted in PDL.
-
Only if you don't accept that Smithman could have been carrying a sleeping Madeleine, and if you reject the Ibiza airport sighting as a positive sighting of MM with the two orphanage collectors wanted in PDL.
I did say 'irrefutable'.
There have been 'sightings' of Madeleine all over the world. Some may have been people who genuinely thought that they'd spotted her; others cashing in for a story to sell or even for a potential reward if ever the lead led somewhere. Not to mention the media frenzy of reporters who allegedly had to file something, realistic or not, during that initial period.
-
I did say 'irrefutable'.
There have been 'sightings' of Madeleine all over the world. Some may have been people who genuinely thought that they'd spotted her; others cashing in for a story to sell or even for a potential reward if ever the lead led somewhere. Not to mention the media frenzy of reporters who allegedly had to file something, realistic or not, during that initial period.
Maybe I class those two events as "irrefutable". Look even simple things like whether the railings were removed, even when there are photos clearly showing them present and others where they appear to be missing, are refuted. There is nothing about this case that is "irrefutable".
-
Only if you don't accept that Smithman could have been carrying a sleeping Madeleine, and if you reject the Ibiza airport sighting as a positive sighting of MM with the two orphanage collectors wanted in PDL.
There is no proof (in the sense of irrefutable evidence) that either of the men - whether two, or one - were in fact carrying Madeleine that night.
Both of these sightings could be as much of a red herring as the Jersey coconut saga, for different reasons. IMO.
-
There is no proof (in the sense of irrefutable evidence) that either of the men - whether two, or one - were in fact carrying Madeleine that night.
Both of these sightings could be as much of a red herring as the Jersey coconut saga, for different reasons. IMO.
That could be so, but I don't know that case. But in my research of this MM case there is a strong connection between the sightings (I feel I have a very comprehensive theory). Maybe Goncalo Amaral felt he had a very comprehensive theory too but since he tested his and it failed, that leaves mine to take its place. Our theories are very similar in lots of ways. Maybe I should talk to him and see if he likes what I'm saying. Sometimes I think he had nearly clicked onto the alternative theory but needed the reconstruction to see if it would work. I must see if my contacts know how to talk to him, for at least they speak the language.
-
That could be so, but I don't know that case. But in my research of this MM case there is a strong connection between the sightings (I feel I have a very comprehensive theory). Maybe Goncalo Amaral felt he had a very comprehensive theory too but since he tested his and it failed, that leaves mine to take its place. Our theories are very similar in lots of ways. Maybe I should talk to him and see if he likes what I'm saying. Sometimes I think he had nearly clicked onto the alternative theory but needed the reconstruction to see if it would work. I must see if my contacts know how to talk to him, for at least they speak the language.
Where is he at the moment? Rumour has it he's in Switzerland finishing his latest book.
-
I did say 'irrefutable'.
There have been 'sightings' of Madeleine all over the world. Some may have been people who genuinely thought that they'd spotted her; others cashing in for a story to sell or even for a potential reward if ever the lead led somewhere. Not to mention the media frenzy of reporters who allegedly had to file something, realistic or not, during that initial period.
I fear that could give the wrong impression Carana, some might take it literally.
-
I fear that could give the wrong impression Carana, some might take it literally.
Well we can always refer to a dictionary and see what irrefutable means.Google on irrefutable irrefutable
adjective
impossible to deny or disprove.
"irrefutable evidence"
synonyms: indisputable, undeniable, unquestionable, incontrovertible, incontestable, unassailable, impregnable, beyond question, indubitable, beyond doubt, beyond dispute, indisputable;
So maybe Smithman and Ibiza are irrefutable since they are "impossible to disprove".
-
Well we can always refer to a dictionary and see what irrefutable means.Google on irrefutable So maybe Smithman and Ibiza are irrefutable since they are "impossible to disprove".
Nothing "Maybe" about it. You either understand what "Irrefutable" means, or you don't.
-
Nothing "Maybe" about it. You either understand what "Irrefutable" means, or you don't.
I looked up the dictionary to be sure and being "impossible to disprove" means something is irrefutable. You might prefer the "impossible to deny" version of the word.
What do you think it means?
-
I looked up the dictionary to be sure and being "impossible to disprove" means something is irrefutable. You might prefer the "impossible to deny" version of the word.
What do you think it means?
You are being argumentative Robittybob1. Please desist and get back to the thread topic.
-
I fear that could give the wrong impression Carana, some might take it literally.
Possibly, for those who don't notice inverted commas.
-
You are being argumentative Robittybob1. Please desist and get back to the thread topic.
How did we get onto this term "irrefutable" anyway? We should be discussing "If Maddie may still be alive...what did the dog's alert to".
-
Possibly, for those who don't notice inverted commas.
I had it clarified at work inverted commas don't change the meaning of the word yet quite often we think it does.
If Maddie may still be alive...what did the dog's alert to. Well it could be Madeleine's blood (dried and putrefied) but not her cadaver. So I contend the alert was to someone else.
-
Still, we would have, in my modest and, again I repeat, little sustained opinion, a methodological problem: in the case of Maddie, we had precise locations and objects which allowed to draw a methodology that is virtually beyond reproach as to the results observed (the dogs visited several apartments, several cars, smelled different pieces of clothing, BUT, I repeat, BUT there were control and “placebo” devices, if I am allowed to exploit these terms, so it is easier to understand).
http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/paulo-sargento-why-he-makes-mccanns-so.html
What does Paulo Sargento mean by "control and “placebo” devices"? Who knew about them?
-
Still, we would have, in my modest and, again I repeat, little sustained opinion, a methodological problem: in the case of Maddie, we had precise locations and objects which allowed to draw a methodology that is virtually beyond reproach as to the results observed (the dogs visited several apartments, several cars, smelled different pieces of clothing, BUT, I repeat, BUT there were control and “placebo” devices, if I am allowed to exploit these terms, so it is easier to understand).
http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/paulo-sargento-why-he-makes-mccanns-so.html
What does Paulo Sargento mean by "control and “placebo” devices"? Who knew about them?
Who knows and who cares? The linked article is 5 years old and has strong Pat Brown connections. Nuff said unless we are short of things to discuss and want to do this for a laugh. Well we are and do I suppose.... ?{)(**
-
Still, we would have, in my modest and, again I repeat, little sustained opinion, a methodological problem: in the case of Maddie, we had precise locations and objects which allowed to draw a methodology that is virtually beyond reproach as to the results observed (the dogs visited several apartments, several cars, smelled different pieces of clothing, BUT, I repeat, BUT there were control and “placebo” devices, if I am allowed to exploit these terms, so it is easier to understand).
http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/paulo-sargento-why-he-makes-mccanns-so.html
What does Paulo Sargento mean by "control and “placebo” devices"? Who knew about them?
I have proven that the alert on cuddle cat was a ruse. The alert on Sean's red top seemed to be a false alert too. So maybe these two fall into that category of placebo. Control would be known contaminations and the expectation that Eddie would alert to these. Maybe the video clips of them have been removed or edited out.
-
Who knows and who cares? The linked article is 5 years old and has strong Pat Brown connections. Nuff said unless we are short of things to discuss and want to do this for a laugh. Well we are and do I suppose.... ?{)(**
If there were "control" and "placebo" devices in place during the dog visit to Praia da Luz as stated by Paulo Sargento, in my opinion it is entirely relevant.
As you say the item is dated Friday, June 17, 2011 when there should have been no ambiguity about the significance of any interference with the English dogs.
Please note ... I for one am not laughing about the circumstances which were the excuse used to make the McCanns arguidos in their daughter's disappearance.
-
Ah, pink-blanket-as-shroud-man.
Paulo Sargento would appear to be the only person with this "knowledge" of controls and placebos. There's no such thing in the files, AFAIK.
-
Ah, pink-blanket-as-shroud-man.
Paulo Sargento would appear to be the only person with this "knowledge" of controls and placebos. There's no such thing in the files, AFAIK.
If it had been known that "controls and placebos" had been in place it would have been mentioned in the Harrison and Grime reports.
Where does Sargento's "knowledge" of what must have been an illicit practice stem from ... and if his information was wrong why hasn't it been denied or corrected?
-
If there were "control" and "placebo" devices in place during the dog visit to Praia da Luz as stated by Paulo Sargento, in my opinion it is entirely relevant.
As you say the item is dated Friday, June 17, 2011 when there should have been no ambiguity about the significance of any interference with the English dogs.
Please note ... I for one am not laughing about the circumstances which were the excuse used to make the McCanns arguidos in their daughter's disappearance.
The fact they were ostensibly the last people to see her[MM] would have been enough in England and Wales for an interview under caution which is tantamount to the same thing as "arguido".
Look at it as the cops doing what they were paid to do rather than a gross affront.
-
Still, we would have, in my modest and, again I repeat, little sustained opinion, a methodological problem: in the case of Maddie, we had precise locations and objects which allowed to draw a methodology that is virtually beyond reproach as to the results observed (the dogs visited several apartments, several cars, smelled different pieces of clothing, BUT, I repeat, BUT there were control and “placebo” devices, if I am allowed to exploit these terms, so it is easier to understand).
http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/paulo-sargento-why-he-makes-mccanns-so.html
What does Paulo Sargento mean by "control and “placebo” devices"? Who knew about them?
In a sense, Sargento is right. Lots of cars, as it happens, all placebos.
Lots of items of clothing, only some picked up in his mouth by Eddie; all ignored by Keela, therefore all placebos; cuddle-cat (ahem). Amost certainly a placebo.
-
The fact they were ostensibly the last people to see her[MM] would have been enough in England and Wales for an interview under caution which is tantamount to the same thing as "arguido".
Look at it as the cops doing what they were paid to do rather than a gross affront.
Blunder upon blunder.
Quote
More recently, it's Eddie who helps to find a body buried under a flagstone at the former orphanage, Haut-de-la-Garenne, in Jersey, setting for a terrible case of paedophilia and child murder. Goncalo Amaral
End quote
Great store was set upon Eddie's 'alerts' in Praia da Luz, to the extent that they were used justify making Madeleine McCann's parents arguidos in her disappearance.
A total misunderstanding of how the dogs are actually used.
The case coordinator at the time seems extraordinarily anxious to perpetuate that misunderstanding by writing a follow up of his interpretation of Eddie's 'alerts' in Haute de la Garenne in Jersey.
Now Paulo Sargento has put it on record that "controls and placebos" such as might be used in a training exercise were used while Eddie was working in the field in Praia da Luz.
Neither Harrison or Grime made mention of that in their reports ... so as far as they are concerned, that scenario just did not happen.
Who was responsible for interfering with the dogs' inspection by doing as Sargento asserts and introducing "controls and placebos" to the crime scene they were working?
-
Blunder upon blunder.
Quote
More recently, it's Eddie who helps to find a body buried under a flagstone at the former orphanage, Haut-de-la-Garenne, in Jersey, setting for a terrible case of paedophilia and child murder. Goncalo Amaral
End quote
Great store was set upon Eddie's 'alerts' in Praia da Luz, to the extent that they were used justify making Madeleine McCann's parents arguidos in her disappearance.
A total misunderstanding of how the dogs are actually used.
The case coordinator at the time seems extraordinarily anxious to perpetuate that misunderstanding by writing a follow up of his interpretation of Eddie's 'alerts' in Haute de la Garenne in Jersey.
Now Paulo Sargento has put it on record that "controls and placebos" such as might be used in a training exercise were used while Eddie was working in the field in Praia da Luz.
Neither Harrison or Grime made mention of that in their reports ... so as far as they are concerned, that scenario just did not happen.
Who was responsible for interfering with the dogs' inspection by doing as Sargento asserts and introducing "controls and placebos" to the crime scene they were working?
A (minor) quibble with the one word I highlight.
I think the (more) apt word, there, would be were.
Even though are also fits, though in a sense less important (alright, then, just this once): in my opinion ....
-
Blunder upon blunder.
Quote
More recently, it's Eddie who helps to find a body buried under a flagstone at the former orphanage, Haut-de-la-Garenne, in Jersey, setting for a terrible case of paedophilia and child murder. Goncalo Amaral
End quote
Great store was set upon Eddie's 'alerts' in Praia da Luz, to the extent that they were used justify making Madeleine McCann's parents arguidos in her disappearance.
A total misunderstanding of how the dogs are actually used.
The case coordinator at the time seems extraordinarily anxious to perpetuate that misunderstanding by writing a follow up of his interpretation of Eddie's 'alerts' in Haute de la Garenne in Jersey.
Now Paulo Sargento has put it on record that "controls and placebos" such as might be used in a training exercise were used while Eddie was working in the field in Praia da Luz.
Neither Harrison or Grime made mention of that in their reports ... so as far as they are concerned, that scenario just did not happen.
Who was responsible for interfering with the dogs' inspection by doing as Sargento asserts and introducing "controls and placebos" to the crime scene they were working?
How does this materially affect the content of the post to which it purports to be a response?
-
The fact they were ostensibly the last people to see her[MM] would have been enough in England and Wales for an interview under caution which is tantamount to the same thing as "arguido".
Look at it as the cops doing what they were paid to do rather than a gross affront.
It never occurred to the PJ to suspect Kate and Gerry until around August/September 2007.
-
It never occurred to the PJ to suspect Kate and Gerry until around August/September 2007.
I thought the official supporters view was that Amaral suspected them from day one, to the exclusion of all else.
OK, apart from Murat.
OK, and Malinka.
OK, and everyone else the PJ chased.
Is it now proposed that the PJ was tardy in suspecting the McCanns, or is Aug/Sep about right? Or were they hasty?
-
I thought the official supporters view was that Amaral suspected them from day one, to the exclusion of all else.
OK, apart from Murat.
OK, and Malinka.
OK, and everyone else the PJ chased.
Is it now proposed that the PJ was tardy in suspecting the McCanns, or is Aug/Sep about right? Or were they hasty?
I tend to think it was from day two since they asked for the first interview and never followed that up. Next recorded interview was her arguido statements. A lot of vital information was lost because it has never been recorded.
Further and more timely interviews with Kate should have happened earlier. This excuse about her being too distraught is not shown to be true when you read and see what she was up to in the next few days. It is just a poor excuse.
-
I thought the official supporters view was that Amaral suspected them from day one, to the exclusion of all else.
OK, apart from Murat.
OK, and Malinka.
OK, and everyone else the PJ chased.
Is it now proposed that the PJ was tardy in suspecting the McCanns, or is Aug/Sep about right? Or were they hasty?
That is the official Amaral view, as expressed in, I believe, the El Mundo interview.
-
It never occurred to the PJ to suspect Kate and Gerry until around August/September 2007.
Have you forgotten that in the UK the parents would be under investigation from the start.
UK police also told the PJ to investigate the McCann's.
Third, what did the local Police see when they encountered the McCann's ?
-
I thought the official supporters view was that Amaral suspected them from day one, to the exclusion of all else.
OK, apart from Murat.
OK, and Malinka.
OK, and everyone else the PJ chased.
Is it now proposed that the PJ was tardy in suspecting the McCanns, or is Aug/Sep about right? Or were they hasty?
Like a lot of other things around here it is sponsored by the Estoril Elastic Company SA...... it stretches and bends to be what you want it to be.
-
How does this materially affect the content of the post to which it purports to be a response?
In my opinion your post, like this one to which I am now replying, sought to deflect from Sargento's statement.
I have not seen what he said about "placebos" and "controls" discussed in any detail anywhere else.
Indeed I have not seen it discussed at all.
-
Blunder upon blunder.
Quote
More recently, it's Eddie who helps to find a body buried under a flagstone at the former orphanage, Haut-de-la-Garenne, in Jersey, setting for a terrible case of paedophilia and child murder. Goncalo Amaral
End quote
Great store was set upon Eddie's 'alerts' in Praia da Luz, to the extent that they were used justify making Madeleine McCann's parents arguidos in her disappearance.
A total misunderstanding of how the dogs are actually used.
The case coordinator at the time seems extraordinarily anxious to perpetuate that misunderstanding by writing a follow up of his interpretation of Eddie's 'alerts' in Haute de la Garenne in Jersey.
Now Paulo Sargento has put it on record that "controls and placebos" such as might be used in a training exercise were used while Eddie was working in the field in Praia da Luz.
Neither Harrison or Grime made mention of that in their reports ... so as far as they are concerned, that scenario just did not happen.
Who was responsible for interfering with the dogs' inspection by doing as Sargento asserts and introducing "controls and placebos" to the crime scene they were working?
Could the controls and placebos have been behind Grime's and Harrison's back, so that even they didn't know about these controls and placebos. That would be the ultimate use of "controls and placebos", to use them blind so the dog handler and search coordinator is not aware of what is real or unreal too.