" ...
“Can you confirm if the signal given regarding the stuffed toy corresponds to a concrete alert of detection of a cadaver, or a mere trick played by the dog”
From Grime’s predictably indignant response, we learn something else startling:
The dogs were not taught any ‘tricks’. The cadaver dog, Eddie, reacted to the toy, which at my request was retained by the Judicial Police for future forensic analysis. I have no knowledge of the results of any forensic analysis on the toy.
... "
Was Cuddle Cat retained by the JP?
'False' positives are always a possibility; to date Eddie has not so indicated
operationally or in training. In six years of operational deployment in over 200
criminal case searches the dog has never alerted to meat based and
specifically pork foodstuffs designed for human consumption. Similarly the
dog has never alerted to 'road kill', that is any other dead animal.
My experience as a trainer is that false alerts are normally caused by handler
cueing. All indications by the dog are preceded by a change in bahaviour.
This increased handler confidence in the response. This procedure also stops
handlers 'cueing' and indication. The dogs are allowed to 'free search' and
investigate areas of interest. The handler does not influence their behaviour
other than to direct the search.
Legend has it ...
From the PJ files http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
That is a very good question.
1. She was seen in her bed but no odour found on her bed clothes.
2. Cadaver odour in the car but DNA from the car was not a perfect match to Madeleine.
3. Dani Krugel found two sites of interest with his mystery machine. These two hairs were given to him from different items and therefore they may have been from two different people to get the two "high priority" places.
Eddie's reaction (to the car) was spots of Gerry's blood on the ignition key.Eddie was not put inside the Scenic, therefore the boot was not studiously ignored.
Eddie studiously ignored the boot ....
Eddie was not put inside the Scenic, therefore the boot was not studiously ignored.
The dog alerted to the driver's door of the Scenic, then to the key fob buried in a bucket of sand.
'False' positives are always a possibility; to date Eddie has not so indicated
operationally or in training. In six years of operational deployment in over 200
criminal case searches the dog has never alerted to meat based and
specifically pork foodstuffs designed for human consumption. Similarly the
dog has never alerted to 'road kill', that is any other dead animal.
My experience as a trainer is that false alerts are normally caused by handler
cueing. All indications by the dog are preceded by a change in bahaviour.
This increased handler confidence in the response. This procedure also stops
handlers 'cueing' and indication. The dogs are allowed to 'free search' and
investigate areas of interest. The handler does not influence their behaviour
other than to direct the search.
you are still wrong
first it is 200 case searches not cases...eddie has not been involved in 200 cases
what grime is saying is eddie has never alerted to meat for human consumption. amaral thought this meant eddie had not been found wrong in 200 cases......another myth
Eddie was not put inside the Scenic, therefore the boot was not studiously ignored.So what does Eddies alert tell us
The dog alerted to the driver's door of the Scenic, then to the key fob buried in a bucket of sand.
So what does Eddies alert tell us
I'm sure most people would tend to disagree with you. At that stage didn't Eddie have score card of 199 out of 200 cases being correctly indicated.
I think the three key issues to me were:
1. Why was there no cadaver odour on Madeleine's bed clothes yet it was on cuddle cat.
2. How could there be cadaver odour in the rental car hired 3 weeks after the event.
3. Why would there be cadaver odour in 3 places around apartment 5A.
So what does Eddies alert tell us
Eddie's alerts - we know what his alert told the police in the Prout case.......find the body. Actually if you give me one case where Eddie has alerted and the police haven't looked for a body I would be amazed. This case is no different. They are looking for a body and they will be nearly 100% sure who was seen carrying it heading towards the beach. Tannerman is found but not Smithman. The only credible and last line of inquiry has to be this in this case. I had it from the start and nothing has changed except proving it.So again
So again
What does eddies alert at the car tell us
No waffle this time
"The dog has also been trained to identify 'dead body' scent contamination where there is no physically retrievable evidence, due to scent adhering to pervious material such as carpet or the upholstery in motor vehicles. Whereas there may be no retrievable evidence for court purposes this may well assist intelligence gathering in Major Crime investigations."Dog was also trained to detect blood
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
Eddie's alerts - we know what his alert told the police in the Prout case.......find the body. Actually if you give me one case where Eddie has alerted and the police haven't looked for a body I would be amazed. This case is no different. They are looking for a body and they will be nearly 100% sure who was seen carrying it heading towards the beach. Tannerman is found but not Smithman. The only credible and last line of inquiry has to be this in this case. I had it from the start and nothing has changed except proving it.
Eddie was not put inside the Scenic, therefore the boot was not studiously ignored.
The dog alerted to the driver's door of the Scenic, then to the key fob buried in a bucket of sand.
Eddie alerted in the Prout matrimonial home.
The late Kate Prout (RIP) was buried in an out-house, several hundred yards away.
So againThe dog's alerts are indicators. In the New Theory it indicates the driver or maybe a passenger of the car had been contact with a cadaver.
What does eddies alert at the car tell us
No waffle this time
Dog was also trained to detect bloodThere were two dogs one for the cadaver odour and the other for dried human blood AFAIK.
So what was the alert to
No Ferryman, she wasn't. She was buried outside under what was then a pheasant pen. No doubt the pheasant poo was enough to confuse the poor cadaver dog.
I don't know what Eddie actually searched outdoors at 276 acre Redhill Farm but we know it was wrapped in plastic sheeting which would stop any scent from escaping for the dog to find.Cadaver odour would permeate plastic sheeting IMO.
....
I doubt the English police would have sent an untrained dog to PDL. I believe there wasn't a dog more capable (at the time) than Eddie in finding cadaver odour.
It was Kate and Gerry who didn't have a clue. They admitted that they "could not explain it".
Somewhere there is a Freedom of Information response from SYP confirming Frankie the cadaver dog had a higher success rate than Eddie. I'm sure Ferryman can oblige........
It's only a matter of time before MG releases his records at the body farm etc. The FBI were most impressed and it will be interesting to know when SY used him. Eddie and Frankie were both used in the Attracta Harron case and Eddie got the evidence in the burned out shell of a car when forensics found nothing. Eddie also found the body.
there seems to be only 3 or 4 cases where eddie found anything useful....not such a sparkling career
there seems to be only 3 or 4 cases where eddie found anything useful....not such a sparkling career
It may become super sparkling if this case is solved so don't count your chickens 8(>((
I don't know what Eddie actually searched outdoors at 276 acre Redhill Farm but we know it was wrapped in plastic sheeting which would stop any scent from escaping for the dog to find.
"Mrs Prout's remains were found wrapped in a curtain and plastic sheeting, the inquest was told."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-17938610
"Detective inspector Steve Bean of Gloucestershire Police told the inquest that Prout confessed to wrapping the body in a carpet and plastic sheeting and putting it in his Range Rover."
http://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/9687871.print/
the dogs have provided nothing of any use to this case...neither did they in Jersey
I don't agree davel. The dogs provided several alerts, granted the conditions were questionable and the cuddlecat episode was an utter sham, but that aside, these dogs have a proven record in CSI detection techniques. The results as confirmed by Martin Grime certainly have no evidential reliability under the Law but they are still evidence. Both dogs alerted in accordance with their training, Eddie in particular having been trained to find corpses. One cannot just brush that under the carpet in a case where a young girl has disappeared under suspicious circumstances! To do so would be utterly foolish imo.
Evidence of what John
For the millionth time
What do the alerts tell us
The several alerts by a cadaver dog of proven worth tell us that a deceased person or objects/materials which came into contact with a deceased person could have been detected.
The several alerts by a cadaver dog of proven worth tell us that a deceased person or objects/materials which came into contact with a deceased person could have been detected. A child disappears, a cadaver dog alerts, a coincidence too far?
The dogs are only of proven worth if they have been independently tested
They haven't
Rubbish. Their record speaks for itself.
Rubbish. Their record speaks for itself.
your post feeds myths....that's why some think the McCanns are guilty....they believe the hype about the dogs...to feed those myths is a disgrace
Not so. The fact is that a cadaver dog alerted to objects and accommodation associated with a missing child. What people make of this is up to them.
The alerts could be entirely coincidental but then again as already pointed out, they thought that too in the Prout case but as it turned out...THE DOG WAS RIGHT!!
Eddie has only had a handful of successful outings. like any CSI dog they are there to find evidence and when they do their input can be sensational...these dogs found no evidence on this occasion and therefore add nothing to case..
Grime could have said in his opinion the dog alerted to cadaver odour...he didn't even go that far
My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.The word you should have highlghted is "suggestive", not to mention the "no evidential or intellience reliability" bit.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
Not blood Davel but cadaver scent and corroborating evidence is required to prove the dog alerts.
The word you should have highlghted is "suggestive", not to mention the "no evidential or intellience reliability" bit.
My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
Not blood Davel but cadaver scent and corroborating evidence is required.
Suggestive is a term you use to save one's ass incase a miracle happens and she turns up alive.
His professional opinion is that Eddie alerted to cadaver scent not blood. All cadaver dogs can alert to blood but they go into crime scene's first to detect cadaver scent. Microscopic blood is much weaker and harder for a dog to detect so Keela was used to only detect blood. None on the clothes, none detected at the first alert at the wardrobe. So they would conclude Eddie alerted to cadaver scent. No evidence of the missing person 9 years later so they would still conclude it was cadaver scent that Eddie alerted to.
The several alerts by a cadaver dog of proven worth tell us that a deceased person or objects/materials which came into contact with a deceased person could have been detected. A child disappears, a cadaver dog alerts, a coincidence too far?
Having watched the video footage from Praia da Luz and what has come to be accepted as the cadaver dog alerting, I think it safe to say that the same dog showed the same behaviour from one end of Haute de la Garenne to the other.
The mistaken intelligence thus provided set the investigation into the actuality of what may have happened to children in care at the home off track and ran the risk for future prosecutions of offenders.
In parallel with the misinterpreted intelligence vis-a-vis the McCann case which was allowed to run to the extent of implicating the wrong people as suspects.
The ramifications of which are felt to the present day as evidenced by threads such as this on various fora on the internet.
THE INDEPENDENT JERSEY CARE INQUIRY
Page 30
28
By this time, the Metropolitan Police review team had expressed the view that no bodies had been buried at Haut de la Garenne.
Page 31
94
In his review, Matt Tapp concluded that statements had been made in relation to the 'skull fragment', 'cellars' and 'shackles' which were not accurate; that 'the nature and quantity of much of the media coverage was generated and sustained by the police's deliberate decision to provide a regular diet of information to the media'; and that 'on a number of occasions, [Lenny Harper] 31 32 placed information and allegations into the public domain, or responded to issues and allegations in the media, which distracted attention from the child abuse investigation, and this may have tarnished the reputation of the force and weakened public confidence in the investigation and its professionalism'.
http://www.jerseycareinquiry.org/Transcripts/Day%20126%20Documents%20Optimised.pdf
I think it is obvious the cadaver dog did its job in both cases. In both cases, nobody, not even his handler knows why he was barking.
There are apparently some who refute the substantial body of evidence from Jersey to that effect and publish conspiracy theories of the murder of children; which were we to take the cadaver dog at his bark would have been a massacre.
Unfortunately, the case in Luz was not subject to the same internal inquiries ... leaving even more room for speculation and wild, preposterous theories.
Having watched the video footage from Praia da Luz and what has come to be accepted as the cadaver dog alerting, I think it safe to say that the same dog showed the same behaviour from one end of Haute de la Garenne to the other.
The mistaken intelligence thus provided set the investigation into the actuality of what may have happened to children in care at the home off track and ran the risk for future prosecutions of offenders.
In parallel with the misinterpreted intelligence vis-a-vis the McCann case which was allowed to run to the extent of implicating the wrong people as suspects.
The ramifications of which are felt to the present day as evidenced by threads such as this on various fora on the internet.
"One end to the other" ? A bit of an exaggeration Brietta.
Dogs don't lie so Eddie found scent consistent with his training.
"One end to the other" ? A bit of an exaggeration Brietta.
Dogs don't lie so Eddie found scent in the children's home consistent with his training. He also found scent in the Print bungalow and the McCann apartment.
unfortunately dogs don't speak either so without any sort of confirmation..even the opinion of the handler would be something...we do not know what the dog was alerting to
We don't but history tells us no to ignore them all the same.
" ...
“Can you confirm if the signal given regarding the stuffed toy corresponds to a concrete alert of detection of a cadaver, or a mere trick played by the dog”
From Grime’s predictably indignant response, we learn something else startling:
The dogs were not taught any ‘tricks’. The cadaver dog, Eddie, reacted to the toy, which at my request was retained by the Judicial Police for future forensic analysis. I have no knowledge of the results of any forensic analysis on the toy.
... "
Was Cuddle Cat retained by the JP?
63
Grime's opinion was the antithesis of professional, as was his manner of deployment (of the dogs).
It is unfair to blame Grime for the way in which the inspections were undertaken. He was not responsible for the way in which the items to be inspected were transported or laid out, nor did he have the authority to veto decisions made by the police in charge in respect of locations etc. He was put in the position where he either went along with the PJ or renege and return home. I'm sure he would be the first to admit that the deployment was not ideal by any stretch of the imagination.
Point to note: From Mr Grime's profile:
POINTS TO ASSIST
Whilst it is stated that the E.V.R D. is originally trained using pig the following notes
of guidance should be considered when assessing indications:
P In six years operational deployment in over 200 cases the dog has never
alerted to meat based foodstuffs.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
It is unfair to blame Grime for the way in which the inspections were undertaken. He was not responsible for the way in which the items to be inspected were transported or laid out, nor did he have the authority to veto decisions made by the police in charge in respect of locations etc. He was put in the position where he either went along with the PJ or renege and return home. I'm sure he would be the first to admit that the deployment was not ideal by any stretch of the imagination.
Point to note: From Mr Grime's profile:
POINTS TO ASSIST
Whilst it is stated that the E.V.R D. is originally trained using pig the following notes
of guidance should be considered when assessing indications:
P In six years operational deployment in over 200 cases the dog has never
alerted to meat based foodstuffs.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
Professional trained dogs can smell human cadaver remnant scent 3 months later but humans can't! Eddie has been proven to have done so in other cases and no chicken or pig went missing from 5A.
The three months was in a closed room
There is no data for how long scent would last in a room like 5a
And likewise for how long the scent would last outside in a flowerbed
Dogs alerted to scent many years later (not months) in the Zapata case so don't underestimate a dog's nose.
Oct. 11, 1976: Jeanette Zapata vanishes.
Jan. 12, 2005: Madison police use cadaver dogs to check the basement of Zapata's former home on Indian Trace in Madison. Other cadaver dog searches of that property and other locations take place throughout 2005 and into 2006. The dogs alert to the scent of human remains, but none are found.
Dogs alerted to scent many years later (not months) in the Zapata case so don't underestimate a dog's nose.
Oct. 11, 1976: Jeanette Zapata vanishes.
Jan. 12, 2005: Madison police use cadaver dogs to check the basement of Zapata's former home on Indian Trace in Madison. Other cadaver dog searches of that property and other locations take place throughout 2005 and into 2006. The dogs alert to the scent of human remains, but none are found.
I hope you are following with interest the cadaver dogs in the Deorr Kunz case. Seems a PI, too, with an expert canine, can find many clues local law enforcement officers & their dogs failed to.
The dogs seem to alert everywhere so it's not surprising some results are confirmed yrs later
It's called junk science
Eddie only seemed to get any confirmed results in about 5 cases
If he alerts at the site of a missing person there is a reasonable chance a body will have been there
I'm doing my best to follow it thanks Misty. "They both have mental health issues." Sheriff Lyn Bowerman
@)(++(* How didn't he alert in any other apartment or anything related to Murat?
Yes how come he didn't? Strange isn't it that Eddie alerted to the key fob which had Gerry's blood on it, yet he didn't alert once to blood in ANY of the other apartments, in all the years that people have stayed in those apartments there was no trace of blood.
If maybe Eddie had alerted to blood in the other apartments, if Eddie hadn't been called back numerous times to the bedroom in 5a before he alerted. If Eddie hadn't have just played with Cuddle Cat and picked the clothes up in his mouth, and hadn't alerted to a coconut, then maybe I would have taken the alerts more seriously.
Grime didn't say he alerted to blood. It could have been another reason. Keela alerted to blood in the boot not matching Gerry but Madeleine's profile. They should have asked Gerry if he remembered how he got blood on his car key? Just to see his reaction.
There was no blood recovered from the boot and no match to maddies profile from the DNA found there
I despair. I really do. This is turning into, "Who can come up with the daftest idea."
An incomplete DNA result is the first words so that doesn't rule out Madeleine McCann.
There was no blood recovered from the boot and no match to maddies profile from the DNA found there
From: Lowe, Mr J R [mailto:John.Lowe@fss.pnn.police.uk
Sent: 03 September 2007 15:01
To: stuart.prior@leicestershire.pnn.police.uk
Subject: Op Task - In Confidence
Stuart
Firstly, here are the last three results you are expecting
An incomplete DNA result was obtained from cellular material on the swab 3a. The swab contained very little information and showed low level indications of DNA from more than one person. However, all of the confirmed DNA components within this result match the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Madeline McCann. LCN DNA profiling is highly sensitive it is not possible to attribute this DNA profile to a particular body fluid.
There is no evidence to support the view that Madeline MCCann contributed DNA to the swab 3B.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MADELEINES_DNA.htm
Scarcely surprising, considering that in the mix is also likely to have been DNA from 4 of Madeleine's direct blood-relatives: her parents and her twin-siblings (all with very similar profiles, and no doubt a very high number of alike markers to Madeleine).
Anyhow, Eddie ignored the boot and reacted to spots of Gerry's blood on the ignition key.
Makes one wonder how DNA material from the family got into the carpet area of the luggage compartment of the Scenic hire car in the first place?
Makes one wonder how DNA material from the family got into the carpet area of the luggage compartment of the Scenic hire car in the first place?
One can only speculate why they had to partially dismantle the vehicle to find the material in an area repeatedly tapped at by the dog handler.
Quite right, though ....
The word blood is not used once in John Lowe's report; remarkable, when you consider that only stuff reacted to by Keela (not trained to react to anything else) was sent to the laboratory.
Or the fact that clothing he, apparently, could find no trace of a scent of in the villa, he (apparently) could (exactly the same items!) in the gym?
Maybe stop and thnk why edidie DID bark at the clothesCan you tell me why he didn't bark earlier in the villa, but he barked later in the gym ?
Can you tell me why he didn't bark earlier in the villa, but he barked later in the gym ?
Where did the scent suddenly appear from?
Can you tell me why he didn't bark earlier in the villa, but he barked later in the gym ?
Where did the scent suddenly appear from?
No one here is a dog handler and no one is privy to anythng
The clothes were not laid out i ndividually in the villa as they were in the gym
The clothes may have been scrunched up together in the villa with others, tag on any other reason, its all non professional speculation
The actual professional stated it was hs opinion the dogs alerts suggested cadaver scent contaminant
Those are the facts
Davel said he was gong toemail hm a couple days ago, maybe ask him how he got along
8)-)))
Nite now
Recently a VR dog alerted to an area of ground in a USA case. Digging revealed a buried animal. So why did the dog alert? There is a reason - and it shows how good these dogs are - Pathfinder and Misty will probably get it.
If Grime has been discussing this case privately and you are posting his views on a public forum he needn't worry about keeping his powder dry ...he would have disqualified himself as an expert witness
MG has never posted his views on a public forum but educating you about his dogs is a full time job. He is an expert witness. And others using the Zapata case as example of cadaver dogs being wrong certainly backfired @)(++(*Without wishing to divert the thread, what is the requirement for someone to qualify as an expert witness in a UK court of criminal law?
Without wishing to divert the thread, what is the requirement for someone to qualify as an expert witness in a UK court of criminal law?
I ask this for a simple reason. If I was sitting on a jury and the judge permitted Martin Grime to be classed as an expert witness, then the judge would find himself/herself short of a juror, unless considerable questions about Mr Grime's expertise, the dogs' capability, the dogs' training and testing, and the dogs' deployment in this and other cases were resolved satisfactorily.
Despite reading multiple dogs threads in multiple places, I have yet to see one that leads me to elevate Mr Grime to the status of 'expert', or to convince me to put faith in the dogs. That information may exist, but if it does so, it is not in the public domain, IMO.
I would expect to see Mr Grime undergoing an extensive grilling by any half-competent barrister. As to whether Mr Grime would pass muster or die a flame-roasted death, who knows.
Recently a VR dog alerted to an area of ground in a USA case. Digging revealed a buried animal. So why did the dog alert? There is a reason - and it shows how good these dogs are - Pathfinder and Misty will probably get it.
"Training records are maintained and are available if required."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
"Training records are maintained and are available if required."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
this is the part I like from your link...
Homicide investigation. I develop methods of detecting forensically recoverable
evidence by the use of dogs and facilitate training.
the dogs are trained to recover evidence...that is there purpose
The dogs are trained to react to scents.
It is the job of humans to find evidence.
Without wishing to divert the thread, what is the requirement for someone to qualify as an expert witness in a UK court of criminal law?
I ask this for a simple reason. If I was sitting on a jury and the judge permitted Martin Grime to be classed as an expert witness, then the judge would find himself/herself short of a juror, unless considerable questions about Mr Grime's expertise, the dogs' capability, the dogs' training and testing, and the dogs' deployment in this and other cases were resolved satisfactorily.
Despite reading multiple dogs threads in multiple places, I have yet to see one that leads me to elevate Mr Grime to the status of 'expert', or to convince me to put faith in the dogs. That information may exist, but if it does so, it is not in the public domain, IMO.
I would expect to see Mr Grime undergoing an extensive grilling by any half-competent barrister. As to whether Mr Grime would pass muster or die a flame-roasted death, who knows.
Fundamentally one has to be accepted as an expert in the field by both sides.
Recently a VR dog alerted to an area of ground in a USA case. Digging revealed a buried animal. So why did the dog alert? There is a reason - and it shows how good these dogs are - Pathfinder and Misty will probably get it.Here is the answer, it was one of the places alerted by a dog called Chance in Idaho in June 2016.
The dogs are trained to react to scents.they both did
It is the job of humans to find evidence.
they both didYou can get convictions just from circumstantial evidence alone. So ultimately you don't need the body, just enough circumstantial evidence.
The question is if eddie alerted to cadaver odour, whichhis handler said he did, canbe proved, it cant,so its circumstantial "evidence" but evidence/intelligence all the same
Evenif 100 per cent certainty of MMs dna was there for keela to find, it would stillbe circumstantial without a body, if a body is ever found that circumstantial evidence would be strengthened
they both did
The question is if eddie alerted to cadaver odour, whichhis handler said he did, canbe proved, it cant,so its circumstantial "evidence" but evidence/intelligence all the same
Evenif 100 per cent certainty of MMs dna was there for keela to find, it would stillbe circumstantial without a body, if a body is ever found that circumstantial evidence would be strengthened
grime did not say Eddie reacted to cadaver odour....have you still not grasped that.....so no evidence circumstantial or otherwise...no wonder all your conclusions are wrongThat surprises me.
That surprises me.
WhyI made a comment on another thread. It was the car booth not the car boot. So Eddie alerted to the car booth not the boot. In other words the inside of the Renault Scenic hire car.
Have you been reading the rubbish on other forums
I made a comment on another thread. It was the car booth not the car boot. So Eddie alerted to the car booth not the boot. In other words the inside of the Renault Scenic hire car.I realise you won't have a cite for that
What date was it actually hired. That could make a significant difference.
Of all the alerts made by Eddie during his career
How many have actually been confirmed as cadaver odour
Is it 4 or 5
I realise you won't have a cite for thathttp://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm
Tavares?As per the links spelling errors are always possible in a link address. Not a big issue.
Here is the answer, it was one of the places alerted by a dog called Chance in Idaho in June 2016.
"Chance is trained on human decomposition and human blood pathogen decomposition"
The 3rd alert was "10 Feet Due East of camp site. This area was excavated by hand – and found that a previous animal had been buried at this location. During the burial the subject who did the burial cut his hand and bled into a towel wrapped around the animal."
(Source: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7045.msg346067#msg346067 )
As per the links spelling errors are always possible in a link address. Not a big issue.
Why did you ask that question?
Tavares is discredited.
Everyone involved in ths case who even oozes the notion of mccann cmplicity is discredited in your mind
Doesnt make an iota of your beliefs true though
Tavares is superseded by the final PJ report (written by Joao Carlos).I like the way you treat certain pj members words as written in stone and others as rubbsh as it suits plus the Grime [ deleted ] when you have no idea or qualification to do so....you also know eddie was called enhanced because he was trained in real human cadavers instead of pigs therefore "enhancing" his ablities...[ deleted ]
At the time of the Smith sighting, Gerry was in the Tapas restaurant (Carlos says so).
Woke and wandered was considered as an outside possibility of explanation of Madeleine's disappearance (and dismissed).
Joao Carlos says so.
Grime invented the "enhanced" victim recovery dog title.
I think they were worth it. It has been the thing that really started this case unravelling. To understand how there could be so many cadaver indications you need to have at least two persons as victims.
I think they were worth it. It has been the thing that really started this case unravelling. To understand how there could be so many cadaver indications you need to have at least two persons as victims.No you dont
South Yorkshire Police - Eddie deployment chargesThey may be the costs but the national search adviser mark harrison wouldnt recommend them unless actually required in case solvng!
Freedom of Information Request
30 March 200
What does the South Yorkshire constabulary charge for Eddie the sniffer dog’s services?
The daily charges for the deployment of Eddie were £700 per day Monday to Friday and £900 per day for weekly leave days and bank holidays. These charges have not changed over the last five years and are still applicable to date.
http://www.southyorkshire.police.uk/foi/disclosurelog/sniffer-dog-deployments-costs
I think they were worth it. It has been the thing that really started this case unravelling. To understand how there could be so many cadaver indications you need to have at least two persons as victims.Sorry Robitty, but you haven't been here for the analysis of the dogs and what their alerts mean.
I like the way you treat certain pj members words as written in stone and others as rubbsh as it suits plus the Grime [ deleted ] when you have no idea or qualification to do so....you also know eddie was called enhanced because he was trained in real human cadavers instead of pigs therefore "enhancing" his ablities...[ deleted ]
Sorry Robitty, but you haven't been here for the analysis of the dogs and what their alerts mean.
They dont mean anything without forensic confirmation ... and there has been none.
Additionally several alerts have been much criticized. For example:
1) the alerts to the car. Martin Grime had to keep calling Eddie back with a very stern 'here' and almost guiding him to alert such was Martins persistence in loudly rapping the car in certain places. The alert is flawed because Keela had already alerted meaning that it was blood from a living person. When Eddie alerted outside the car * IF * it was to a scent coming from within the car, then the likely hood is that he was alerting again to blood from a living person. Not to a cadavar.
2) The cuddlecat alert inside the villa/ apartment that the Mccanns stayed in later.
Eddie actually played withn cuddlecat, throwing it in the air ... and no alert at that stage.
CC was put in the bottom of a cupboard and Eddie sniffed right by it twice with the door slightly open, but no alert.
A couple of minutes later Martin ordered him to sniff the counter top and suddenly when his nose came close to a pile of folders(Pegasus thinks a pile of clothes) he alerted. He certainly wasn't alerting to CC because of his proximity to it before. He was alerting to the pile or the piece of paper on top. Somehow, it seems, that had become contaminated by the scent of dried living blood or cadavar, or maybe pig / bacon.
Martin claimed that Eddie was alerting to a Cadavar, but he was wrong.
3) The box of clothes. I would prefer Ferryman to go thru this with you, but IIRC the clothes had been in the apartment before and ignored by Eddie. When laid out in the gym after being crudely boxed and taken away, not only did Eddie alert (Very strange as he hadn't before) but he alerted to one of Madeleines younger brothers T shirts. Too small for Madeleine, but claimed as an alert.
Very strange that clothes that had caused no alert to Eddie before suddenly were alerted to.
4) Blood on/ under the tiles of the sitting room. I think this blood turned out to be male blood of a man, but if I have remembered that incorrectly, then I am sure someone will correct me.; Wont you mercury ! 8(0(*
None of the alerts by Eddie came to anything. They have been over-blown by Amaral, who at best didn't understand them
As I have said before, without forensic confirmation, these alerts mean nothing. Also unless Keela has been used alongside Eddie, the alert could be to living person dried blood or to Cadavar
Ferryman is something of an expert on the alerts, as too are others
first its not a she its a he
first its not a she its a he
Keela (she)is a blood dog, eddies (he) the cadaver one
And no he never alerted to any foodstuffs
Grime himself said that Eddie couldn't tell the difference between human cadaver and pig cadaver, so how was that 'enhanced'?
You will have to remind me where he said that and when
Obviously if a cadaver dog is trained on piglets whch are the bearest to human cadaver odour we are told then usng real human cadavers will strengthen and condition the dogs sense
Iyswim
I thnk we have moved way past eddie alerting to dead pigs whch dont actually happen to be strewn around holiday resorts
But Eddie had never trained on human cadavars (at that stage anyhow).
A bacon sarnie is dead pig,, so why may Eddie not have alerted to it?
Im not sure whenhe traned at the body farm, PF might know,I thought it was before 2007, must have been to be in hs cv presented to the pj at the time, as for bacon and processed foods it just isnt the same as decomposing rotting pig bodies sadiePork is dead and it is hung. My understanding is that cadervine starts showing itself an hour or two after death
Pork is dead and it is hung. My understanding is that cadervine starts showing itself an hour or two after deathBadly chilled pig carcases could have a hint of putrefaction.
You will have to remind me where he said that and when
Obviously if a cadaver dog is trained on piglets whch are the bearest to human cadaver odour we are told then usng real human cadavers will strengthen and condition the dogs sense
Iyswim
I thnk we have moved way past eddie alerting to dead pigs whch dont actually happen to be strewn around holiday resorts
Acting in my role of advisor to the U.S. Justice Department I have facilitated assessment of numerous cadaver search dog teams in the United States. These dogs are exclusively trained using human cadaver sources. When I introduced pig based products into training assessments 100%! of the animals alerted to the medium.
> The result from scientific experiment and research to date would tend to support the theory that the scent of human and pig decomposing material is so similar that we are unable to 'train' the dog to distinguish between the two.
That is not to say that this may not be possible in the future.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
According to Martin Grime, Victim Recovery Dogs trained solely using human remains alert to pig without exception.
Grime himself said that Eddie couldn't tell the difference between human cadaver and pig cadaver, so how was that 'enhanced'?
But Eddie had never trained on human cadavars (at that stage anyhow).
A bacon sarnie is dead pig,, so why may Eddie not have alerted to it?
Having worked with dogs over many years I must point out that it is not the dog who can't tell the difference but the handler. All sniffer dogs, be they a tracker dog, a CSI dog or a cadaver dog can most certainly differentiate between different odours but the animal cannot relay that information to its handler if it doesn't know how. The fault is with the inadequate training, not the dog.
The big disadvantage in the UK was that under our Laws, trainers were refused access to train dogs on real human cadavers so instead had to use a pig equivalent or a piece of human bone. This in my opinion was the root of the problem, as always the US has led the way in this field with their CSI body farms etc...
I believe Grime said that none of the cadaver dogs could tell the difference didn't he?
But Eddie had never trained on human cadavars (at that stage anyhow).
A bacon sarnie is dead pig,, so why may Eddie not have alerted to it?
I think he didn't explain it awfully well. The dogs could but couldn't communicate it subsequently.
Most dogs can differentiate between substances but they have no way of communicating those differences if they arent trained to do so. To a dog, searching for a scent is merely a game for which he or she has been trained. If they aren't trained to report a difference between pigs and humans then they will alert as if they are the same.
If you train a dog to find a dead fish he will find a dead fish, if you train him to find a dead pig he will find a dead pig, if you train him to look for a dead pig and dead humans using human bone he will find either but has no way to tell his handler which is which. It all comes down to inadequate training on suitable materials.
If it is still illegal in the UK to use human cadaver material to assist in the proper training of dogs then this needs amending. We shouldn't be dependent on our American cousins for this resource.
I have often wondered how you can train a cadaver dog which has been trained to alert to dead pig, to alert to a human dead body. How can you say to the dog 'right, forget the pig now, you have to alert to dead human instead.' It's impossible to do that, it is obvious that the dog is going to alert to both isn't it.
The dog has however considerable experience in operational recovery of human remains and evidential forensic material and has trained exclusively using human remains in the U.S.A. in association with the F.B.I. The enhanced training of the dog involves the use of collection of 'Dead body scent' odour from corpses using remote technical equipment which does not contact.
The E.V.R.D. will locate cadaver, whether in the whole or parts thereof; deposited surface or sub-surface to a depth of approximately 3-4 feet shortly after death to the advanced stages of deposition and putrefaction through to skeletal. This includes incinerated remains even if large quantities of accelerant have been involved.
The dog will locate human cadaver in water either from the bank side or when deployed in a boat where a large area may be covered using a gridding system.
The dog has also been trained to identify 'dead body' scent contamination where there is no physically retrievable evidence, due to scent adhering to pervious material such as carpet or the upholstery in motor vehicles. Whereas there may be no retrievable evidence for court purposes this may well assist intelligence gathering in Major Crime investigations. This may be completed by the dog being deployed directly to the subject area or by scent samples being taken on sterile gauze pads and the scent check being completed by scent discrimination exercise at a suitable venue.
The dog will alert to the presence of 'dead body' scent whether it is at source or some distance away from a deposition site. This enables the use of the dog to identify the exhaust of the scent through fissures in bedrock or watercourses. A geophysical survey of the area will then reduce the size of the search area.
The dog may be used to screen clothing, vehicles or property in a suitable environment. This is completed in a scent discrimination exercise where controls may be included to increase assurty. I have developed the training of the E.V.R.D. to include the screening of scent pads taken from motor vehicles, property or scenes by a ST100 Scent Transference Unit. The unit is designed in a two-part design. The main body is a battery operated electrical device that draws air in at to the front and exhausts through the rear. There is no 're-circulation' of air within the unit. The second part is a 'grilled' hood that fits to the main body. A sterile gauze pad is fitted into the hood. When operated, the ST100 draws air through the hood and the sterile gauze pad and exhausts through ports to the rear. 'Scent' is trapped in the gauze, which may then be forensically stored for use within scent discrimination exercises. The ST 100 unit is cleaned following use in such a manner that no residual scent is apparent. This is checked by control measures where the dog is allowed to search a given area where the ST 100 is secreted. Any response by the dog would suggest contamination. Tests have shown that the decontamination procedures are effective in this case with the dog NOT alerting to the device when completed. Use of the ST 100 is recommended when subject vehicles, property, clothing, premises are to be forensically protected from contamination by the dog, and for covert deployment. At all other times best practice would be for the dog to be given direct access. Operational use of the ST100 is in a developmental stage.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
Eddie's trip to America##
Specialized K-9 to Aid in Ga. Search todaysthv.com
Monika Rued
Updated: 14 September 2007
A dog trained to detect tiny bits of blood evidence has been brought to Georgia from the UK to help search for a missing woman.
(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/eddie2.jpg)
The FBI, the GBI and Walker County, Georgia, Sheriff's investigators have some new and potentially powerful help in solving the seemingly unsolvable disappearance of Theresa Parker, the Walker County 911 dispatcher. A world-renowned police dog and his handler from England just arrived in Georgia.
The FBI considers them -- Martin Grime and his 7-year-old, English Springer Spaniel, Eddie -- two of the best in the law enforcement specialty of canine forensics, able to find evidence everyone else missed.
"Yes, hopefully we will find Theresa Parker. Yes, we will hopefully find evidence," Grime said at an afternoon news conference with Sheriff Steve Wilson in the Walker County Seat of Lafayette on Thursday afternoon.
Eddie's skill and training enable him to find microscopic evidence that others cannot, even when the evidence is hidden, or even when someone has tried to wash it away.
"A small amount of forensic evidence," for example, "may be under a board in a house, or under a large boulder, and things like that, where forensic evidence can't normally be recovered from. We'll use the dogs to try and locate it for us," Grime said.
Grime and Eddie are in high demand, world wide.
Getting them to Walker County from England to help solve Theresa Parker's disappearance is an indication of how high a priority her case is for the FBI, according to one FBI agent close to the case.
Eddie is a veteran of more than 200 homicide cases, working with Grime, who has 30 years' of law enforcement and military experience in conducting criminal investigations.
No one is officially calling Theresa Parker's case a homicide.
Parker disappeared nearly six months ago, on March 21.
Investigators in Walker County consider Parker's estranged husband, Sam Parker, to be a person of interest in her disappearance. So that's one line of inquiry they will pursue using Eddie's unique technique.
"It focuses on a particular line of inquiry so that we can either say, yes, we found Theresa and we found the guy who's done it or the lady that's done it, or, no," Grime said.
Earlier this year, in Portugal, for example, Martin Grime and Eddie were working the case of the missing 4-year-old English girl, Madeleine McCann.
And it was Eddie that detected what may have been Madeleine's blood in her parents' rental car.
That's one of the reasons investigators now consider Madeleine's parents to be suspects.
Grimes said Eddie is "no miracle machine," but the FBI, GBI and Walker County investigators are clearly hoping the team from England can help crack their case, a case that has confounded everyone.
This past Sunday, Theresa Parker's family and friends marked her 42nd birthday with prayers, saying they are still confident that investigators are doing all they can.
"We still have not given up hope," Sheriff Wilson said Thursday, "and we're still optimistic that she will be found, or that we can find the reason why she disappeared."
Sheriff Wilson is not saying how long Martin Grime and Eddie will be in Walker County, but Grime had already been consulting with investigators, long distance, from his home in the UK, before he arrived in Walker County, and will continue to do so after he returns home.
I think he didn't explain it awfully well. The dogs could but couldn't communicate it subsequently.
Most dogs can differentiate between substances but they have no way of communicating those differences if they arent trained to do so. To a dog, searching for a scent is merely a game for which he or she has been trained. If they aren't trained to report a difference between pigs and humans then they will alert as if they are the same.
If you train a dog to find a dead fish he will find a dead fish, if you train him to find a dead pig he will find a dead pig, if you train him to look for a dead pig and dead humans using human bone he will find either but has no way to tell his handler which is which. It all comes down to inadequate training on suitable materials.
If it is still illegal in the UK to use human cadaver material to assist in the proper training of dogs then this needs amending. We shouldn't be dependent on our American cousins for this resource.
I have often wondered how you can train a cadaver dog which has been trained to alert to dead pig, to alert to a human dead body. How can you say to the dog 'right, forget the pig now, you have to alert to dead human instead.' It's impossible to do that, it is obvious that the dog is going to alert to both isn't it.
Acting in my role of advisor to the U.S. Justice Department I have facilitated assessment of numerous cadaver search dog teams in the United States. These dogs are exclusively trained using human cadaver sources. When I introduced pig based products into training assessments 100%! of the animals alerted to the medium.
> The result from scientific experiment and research to date would tend to support the theory that the scent of human and pig decomposing material is so similar that we are unable to 'train' the dog to distinguish between the two.
That is not to say that this may not be possible in the future.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
According to Martin Grime, Victim Recovery Dogs trained solely using human remains alert to pig without exception.
So? Did a Pig disappear from 5a? Leave pig dna? Any witnesses?
Eddie demonstrated finding cadaver scent in a jail. Some here must think blood could not have been in that jail @)(++(* or he would have alerted to it instead.
"We also saw video played in the courtroom to demonstrate how another dog, Eddie, found a sample pair of pants hidden in the Walker County Jail that was perfumed with a cadaver scent. Eddie is an English Springer Spaniel belonging to Martin Grime, a world-renown forensic K-9 expert based in the United Kingdom."
Sounds, suspiciously, like pseudo-scents to me .....
Dog nose best?
In 2000, freelance dog handler Mick Swindells and his Border collie Shep, a trained human cadaver dog, were called to a 15-acre field near Nottingham to help locate the suspected grave of a murder victim. Shep signalled in one spot and the surrounding area was quickly dug, but nothing was found. Later that day, police returned with an informant, who identified the grave. Shep had been out by a metre.
It transpired that, in digging the grave, the murderer had put his spade through a field drain, causing volatile compounds from the decomposing cadaver to enter the drain. About a metre downhill of the cadaver, the drain was broken, preventing those compounds from dispersing further. The drain had, in effect, separated the body from its scent, and Shep had signalled the dislodged source of that scent – the breakage in the drain.
On another occasion, Swindells and one of his dogs were searching a house when the dog signalled. A cache of bones was found beneath the floorboards at the spot – but they were later identified as pig. Pig carcasses are used in training cadaver dogs. But why would anybody hide a dead pig? The dating of the bones gave a clue: they had probably been buried during the Second World War, when pork was rationed and penalties for dabbling in the black market were severe.
Moral of this story, train dogs using dead pigs, then expect alerts to dead pig products!
Dog nose best?
In 2000, freelance dog handler Mick Swindells and his Border collie Shep, a trained human cadaver dog, were called to a 15-acre field near Nottingham to help locate the suspected grave of a murder victim. Shep signalled in one spot and the surrounding area was quickly dug, but nothing was found. Later that day, police returned with an informant, who identified the grave. Shep had been out by a metre.
It transpired that, in digging the grave, the murderer had put his spade through a field drain, causing volatile compounds from the decomposing cadaver to enter the drain. About a metre downhill of the cadaver, the drain was broken, preventing those compounds from dispersing further. The drain had, in effect, separated the body from its scent, and Shep had signalled the dislodged source of that scent – the breakage in the drain.
On another occasion, Swindells and one of his dogs were searching a house when the dog signalled. A cache of bones was found beneath the floorboards at the spot – but they were later identified as pig. Pig carcasses are used in training cadaver dogs. But why would anybody hide a dead pig? The dating of the bones gave a clue: they had probably been buried during the Second World War, when pork was rationed and penalties for dabbling in the black market were severe.
Moral of this story, train dogs using dead pigs, then expect alerts to dead pig products!
Strangely appropriate. We will have a very large slice of rear garden which is designated as agricultural land. The only reason we can think of is re WW3 and the type of necessity you have described above. We spent a couple of hours talking about it earlier today. How odd!
During the war, people were encouraged to keep chicken, ducks or pigs ... and to grow their own veggies. We kept ducks and ate their eggs, but never the birds cos we got too fond of them. Dad also turned half the rear lawns over to potatoes, asparagus, rhubarb, apples, soft fruit, peas and beans etc and had an allotment.
My hubbies family had a share in a pig with three neighbours. Everyone fed their slops and waste food to the pig and it was divided up when it had grown sufficiently. Maybe some larger families kept their own pig ... and disposed of the smelly carcase in a deep,pit underground?
Maybe, maybe not? Dunno.
Strangely appropriate. We will have a very large slice of rear garden which is designated as agricultural land. The only reason we can think of is re WW3 and the type of necessity you have described above. We spent a couple of hours talking about it earlier today. How odd!
Hopefully, we will not be training a dog to find pig remains!
Are you American?
American: WW1; WW2; etc
English equivalent. First World War, The Great War or The '14-'18 War; Second World War. 8(0(*
English website
http://www.greatwar.co.uk/
A very informative technique - watch the wardrobe alert footage carefully - exactly what point in space did Eddie sniff immediately before barking?From memory it was nose up.
As I see it - Cadaver dog signals to the past presence of human bodies, body parts or decomposed tissue that dried slowly so it could putrefy. So I see 2 sites where the cadaver dog indicated in 5A:
1. At the wardrobe in the main bedroom
2. behind the couch in the lounge
The blood dog reacts to fresh dried blood (i.e. blood that has dried fast enough not to decompose.) It does not determine whose blood it was.
3. The blood dog reacted to blood behind the couch.
So the question is: Does the blood relate to a cadaver?
Is the blood related to MBM or not?
In the end basically it tells us:
A. someone bled and
B. some dead human had been in the apartment in the past.
There maybe no causal relationship between A and B so you can't say the bleeding caused the death.
From memory it was nose up.Yes but his exact nose location during the last sniff just before he alerts is in one particular shelf volume IMO.
Yes but his exact nose location during the last sniff just before he alerts is in one particular shelf volume IMO.So you think you can define an alert even more closely that the general nature expressed by Martin. He worried about air currents.
Readers have to be careful not to confuse cadaverine with human cadaverine.
Erm... John, cadaverine is... cadaverine.the odour detected by the cadaver dogs could be a mixture of thousands of chemicals at once it won't just be the one chemical cadaverine as you say.
It's simply a chemical compound.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaverine
Erm... John, cadaverine is... cadaverine.One of the issues with the dogs is the use of the term 'cadaverine'.
It's simply a chemical compound.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaverine
When it is cadaverine, I am imagining that is the horrible nasty fluid that the body produces when it is decaying?So to get around this problem there are those who say Madeleine died days before, and those that say she died earlier that day or as I have proposed the cadaver odour came from someone else.
Cadaver scent is what Eddie is supposed to alert to, which would not be very strong as Madeleine if she had died in 5a was not left for long, in my opinion not long enough for cadaver scent. I also find it very difficult to imagine that the scent would be there three months later.
So you think you can define an alert even more closely that the general nature expressed by Martin. He worried about air currents.Just saying IMO at the date of this search the concentration (of whatever compounds he signalled) was greater in the air just above the lower shelf than in the air below the lower shelf.
Erm... John, cadaverine is... cadaverine.
It's simply a chemical compound.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadaverine
Just saying IMO at the date of this search the concentration (of whatever compounds he signalled) was greater in the air just above the lower shelf than in the air below the lower shelf.That's at apartment 5A, right?
So to get around this problem there are those who say Madeleine died days before, and those that say she died earlier that day or as I have proposed the cadaver odour came from someone else.
There was no cadaver odour that we know of. Every alert has been found wanting.I would say the opposite the indication were positive but since no physical cadaver has been found you could say they are wanting.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
When it is cadaverine, I am imagining that is the horrible nasty fluid that the body produces when it is decaying?
Cadaver scent is what Eddie is supposed to alert to, which would not be very strong as Madeleine if she had died in 5a was not left for long, in my opinion not long enough for cadaver scent. I also find it very difficult to imagine that the scent would be there three months later.
In the Sam Parker case Eddie alerted in the garage 6 months after Theresa Parker went missing and was proved correct 3.5 years later when her body was found in 2010. ... (snip)Thanks PF that is interesting
In the Sam Parker case Eddie alerted in the garage 6 months after Theresa Parker went missing and was proved correct 3.5 years later when her body was found in 2010.
Grime added Eddie did not seem interested in the vehicles but in a scent that was wafting in the air, based on the way the dog held his nose upward. Grime said Eddie then "hit" on an abandoned house next door. Testimony shows that house was never repaired after a fire gutted the inside and killed a child several years ago.
My comment: In every alert, Eddie seems to hold his head up.
Kate Prout was reported missing on the 4th November 2007.
Eddie alerted on the 19th December 2007.
That's a total of 46 days later.
Eddie was proven correct on 25th November 2011, when Kate Prout's remains were formerly identified.
Eddie alerted in the matrimonial home, several hundred yards from where Prout murdered and buried his wife's body.
The investigation team has taken 1,338 statements and collected 1,027 exhibits. Having reviewed all of the documents, 7,154 actions were raised and 560 lines of enquiry identified, and over thirty international request to countries across the world asking for work to be undertaken on behalf of the Met.
Officers have investigated more than 60 persons of interest. A total of 650 sex offenders have also been considered as well as reports of 8,685 potential sightings of Madeleine around the world.
The Grange team received on average two hundred emails a week, and following the media appeal in October 2013 across three countries, received over 7,000 responses.
http://news.met.police.uk/news/update-on-the-investigation-into-the-disappearance-of-madeleine-mccann-135459
8,685 potential sightings of Madeleine and nada!
I take it that's not a gloat?
They are facts Ferryman. Many reported sightings and nothing to show for it. The dogs have not been proven to be wrong in this case either and new forensic tests/results have not been confirmed by OG.
They are facts Ferryman. Many reported sightings and nothing to show for it. The dogs have not been proven to be wrong in this case either and new forensic tests/results have not been confirmed by OG.
deleted
Grime is not responsible for this case.
It's about time you got a sense of perspective.
Giving due regard to the hostage-to-fortune that is the loose cannon Goncalo Amaral, it is reasonable to speculate that, either but for Grime; or if Grime had handled his dogs professionally, Kate and Gerry McCann might never have been made arguidos.
Grime is not responsible for this case.
It's about time you got a sense of perspective.
(snip) ... Looking at the size of the suitcase it should have been visible ... (snip)Do you agree that the shelf left-right width is greater than the suitcase length Robbity?.
Do you agree that the shelf left-right width is greater than the suitcase length Robbity?.
Do you agree that the shelf left-right width is greater than the suitcase length Robbity?.I agreed it is possible. I do not know the dimensions of anything. I was just looking at the problem from logic with the point of view being "everyone's best interest".
Kate Prout was reported missing on the 4th November 2007.
Eddie alerted on the 19th December 2007.
That's a total of 46 days later.
Eddie was proven correct on 25th November 2011, when Kate Prout's remains were formerly identified.
Eddie alerted in the matrimonial home, several hundred yards from where Prout murdered and buried his wife's body.
"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
Grime testified that there was no methodology to test the dogs' responses when there is no recoverable material, and that the odor of decomposition may transfer if a person touches a dead body and then touches something else.
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
I would say the opposite the indication were positive but since no physical cadaver has been found you could say they are wanting.
To remind anyone reading
Keela alerts to blood from a live person
Eddie alerts to blood from a live person, Cadavar odour, both from pig and human, bodily fluids.
For the alert to have been for Cadavar Odour then the live person blood component has to be ruled out. Both dogs have to have sniffed the spot.
Both dogs have to have sniffed the spot. Then and only then, IF Eddie had alerted there was a chance that it was because of Cadavar odour (pig or human) or bodily fluids. But it was essential that whatever was causing the alert was forensically examined to confirm that the "chance" of it being Cadaver odour, became reality.
If only one dog had sniffed the spot, then it WAS NOT cadaver odour.
Eddie alerted in the matrimonial home, several hundred yards from where Prout murdered and buried his wife's body.
Actually, Adrian Prout murdered his wife in the family bungalow and moved her body to the back of his Land Rover before going to the pub. She was not strangled out on the farm.
There is no getting away from it that both Eddie and Keela were successful in several cases. However, that success is no guarantee that the alerts made to objects in Portugal were in any way sinister.
This thread has now been edited.
Wrong. Prout murdered his wife in the hunting lodge, not in the family home where Eddie alerted. In fact there is no evidence that the body was ever brought into the bungallow where Eddie alerted, and certainly no alert by the dog in the hunting lodge or the Land Rover into which the body was placed and driven to the pub.
http://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/kate-prout-inquest-finally-hears-husband/story-16000525-detail/story.html
Wrong. Prout murdered his wife in the hunting lodge, not in the family home where Eddie alerted. In fact there is no evidence that the body was ever brought into the bungallow where Eddie alerted, and certainly no alert by the dog in the hunting lodge or the Land Rover into which the body was placed and driven to the pub.
http://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/kate-prout-inquest-finally-hears-husband/story-16000525-detail/story.html
To make out it was Kate's fault leaving the family home and following him to the hunting lodge to continue the argument? Was there any evidence found to corroborate his statement? He could have wrapped the body went back to the house and sat on the sofa and that would now be cadaver scent contaminated where Eddie alerted. There are a number of possible scenarios or he could be lying yet again to make out it wasn't all his fault. One thing is certain Adrian Prout is a liar.
I think another thing that is clear is that Eddie's alerts contributed nothing to Prout's prosecution and conviction. Nor did his alerts lead to the recovery of the murdered woman's remains.
But It confirmed to the the police to find a body. SY were doing the same in Luz with dogs.
It doesn't actually matter what the police may or may not believe. It is how much relevant evidence they can gather to convince a jury that matters.Eddie did play a part in the no-body murder charge against Hamilton.
There was enough circumstantial evidence to convince a jury to convict Prout of his wife's murder despite his protestations of innocence ... in which intelligence from Eddie's inspection played no part at all.
Had he not confessed to the murder after his lawful conviction and showed the police where her remains lay it is almost a certainty that Kate Prout's body would never have been recovered and returned to her family.
I think another thing that is clear is that Eddie's alerts contributed nothing to Prout's prosecution and conviction. Nor did his alerts lead to the recovery of the murdered woman's remains.
As long as eddies alerts add an ounce of suspicion on the parents the naysayers will always try everything to make them unimportant/false/fraudulent/attack the handlerYou have seen the truth / proofs of what has, and has not, happened with Eddie and Keela
Same ole same ole rubbish day in day out
There is alot of value in the saying "protest too much"
And their behaviour is NOT a good example of searxhing for facts or truths
What is your best guesstimate of the suitcase dimensions please, Pegasus?I'll do some estimates by scaling from photo Misty ... later.
I'll do some estimates by scaling from photo Misty ... later.
BTW it is clearly described in a statement as "a suitcase".
@Misty one from guest room one from twins room
Quarto des gêmeos - uma mala
Quarto des visitas - uma mala
Source: Proc p2019a
IMO the case with wheels (com rodas) was from guest room, and was completely empty.
IMO the case without wheels (sem rodas) was from twins room, and was completely full.
@Misty one from guest room one from twins room
Quarto des gêmeos - uma mala
Quarto des visitas - uma mala
Source: Proc p2019a
IMO the case with wheels (com rodas) was from guest room, and was completely empty.
IMO the case without wheels (sem rodas) was from twins room, and was completely full.
Found it on page 2098a, not 2019a. (snip)Yes 2098a
Yes 2098aIf my theory is right the suitcase we are looking for belonged to Ocean Club not to the McCanns. It will have been used for a specific purpose and meant to be retuned. It could even have the words "Property of Mark Warner" to make sure it doesn't get stolen.
Case with wheels is irrelevant because belonged IMO to guests probably maternal gparents.
And case without wheels IMO is different to case in 5A wardrobe.
If my theory is right the suitcase we are looking for belonged to Ocean Club not to the McCanns. It will have been used for a specific purpose and meant to be retuned. It could even have the words "Property of Mark Warner" to make sure it doesn't get stolen.Excluding small airline cabin size bags, there were only two large cases or bags in the apartment Robbity.
Excluding small airline cabin size bags, there were only two large cases or bags in the apartment Robbity.What about removed before the Police were called? There seems to be Mark Warner staff there in the apartment when Kate says she was on her own, who also went between Kate's bedroom and the Kid's room. This was prior to the Police being rung.
What about removed before the Police were called? There seems to be Mark Warner staff there in the apartment when Kate says she was on her own, who also went between Kate's bedroom and the Kid's room. This was prior to the Police being rung.Police were phoned about 22:41, no bags were removed before then.
These other two bags could well have been left behind as they belonged to the McCanns.
Police were phoned about 22:41, no bags were removed before then.In the New Theory it is possible to have bags removed just prior to the Police being called.
There were exactly 2 large bags or cases see bmibaby luggage documents.
Both were removed on 5th.
In the New Theory it is possible to have bags removed just prior to the Police being called.
I have said the removed bag would have been belonging to Mark Warner and removed prior to the Police being called. So any photos taken at a later time logically do not change or have any bearing on this prior event.
You would have to have been there to be able to know this: "Police were phoned about 22:41, no bags were removed before then."
You have seen the truth / proofs of what has, and has not, happened with Eddie and Keela
It is YOU that protesteth too much.
In the New Theory it is possible to have bags removed just prior to the Police being called... (snip)(answered on another thread)
Eddie alerted in the matrimonial home, several hundred yards from where Prout murdered and buried his wife's body.
Actually, Adrian Prout murdered his wife in the family bungalow and moved her body to the back of his Land Rover before going to the pub. She was not strangled out on the farm.
There is no getting away from it that both Eddie and Keela were successful in several cases. However, that success is no guarantee that the alerts made to objects in Portugal were in any way sinister.
The link that you gave, John, was immediately after Prout's conviction and well before his confession.
It also neatly illustrates the difference between intelligence and evidence.
As per standard English-court procedure, Eddie's alert in the investigation was not presented to the jury, because it was uncorroborated.
But using the alert (as intelligence) the police hypothesised (we now know, an erroneous detail in a nevertheless safe conviction) that Prout had strangled and murdered his wife in the lounge of the matrimonial home.
Had Eddie not alerted in the family home there was every chance Adrian Prout might have got away with it. As it was, well done Eddie, another success. 8((()*/I thought Prout confessed because he failed a lie test, nothing to do with the (incorrect) dog alert.
Had Eddie not alerted in the family home there was every chance Adrian Prout might have got away with it. As it was, well done Eddie, another success. 8((()*/
I thought Prout confessed because he failed a lie test, nothing to do with the (incorrect) dog alert.
It was a no body murder conviction and if Eddie didn't alert he may have gotten away with it.So Prout didn't confess because he failed the lie detector then? And Eddie correctly alerted in the lounge despite the fact the murder occurred elsewhere and there is no account that the body was ever brought into the house?
ADRIAN Prout has been found guilty of murdering his estranged wife.
The 47-year-old from Redmarley, near Ledbury, will be sentenced on Monday (Feb 8) at Bristol Crown Court.
The businessman was accused of murdering his wife, Kate Prout, following a dispute over a £800,000 divorce settlement.
Mrs Prout, aged 55, has not been seen since disappearing from their Redhill Farm home on November 5, 2007.
The jury returned a guilty verdict on Prout on Friday afternoon following a three-week trial.
Prout, who denied a count of murder, was told by Judge Nigel Davis to expect a life sentence.
http://www.herefordtimes.com/news/regional/herefordshire/4992238.Businessman_found_guilty_of_murder/?ref=arc
Was it ever substantiated that the body had ever been in the home? (I haven't followed this case much.)
I think it was (firmly) established (following Prout's conviction) that Kate's body never was ....
So Prout didn't confess because he failed the lie detector then? And Eddie correctly alerted in the lounge despite the fact the murder occurred elsewhere and there is no account that the body was ever brought into the house?
Really?
Prout did poorly in the lie detector test and when his then girlfriend Debbie Garlick went to visit him in prison afterwards he broke down and confessed to her what he had done. The police were then called to pursue matters further in an attempt to find Kate's body.
It is true that Kate was strangled in the shooting lodge which was a short distance from the family home. Prout had a history of violence towards his wife and attempted to strangle her on another occasion. It was following this earlier assault that Kate said she wanted a divorce and her share of their combined assets. It was after this that Prout formulated the plan to get rid of his wife.
It has never been made public whether the killing of Kate Prout in the shooting lodge was premeditated or as a result of yet another heated argumet which turned violent. All that we know is that Prout strangled her and wrapped her body in some plastic sheeting and rolled it up in curtains taken from the lodge. Prout placed the body in the back of his Land Rover while he went to the pub. He later used one of his mechanical excavators to dig a deep hole in the pheasant pens where he buried Kate's body. It has never been revealed whether her body was taken into the farm bungalow but then why would he?
The period of time between the strangulation and the burial was more than sufficient for cadaverine to form and thereafter contaminate everything it came into contact with including Adrian Prout and his clothing.
Prout did poorly in the lie detector test and when his then girlfriend Debbie Garlick went to visit him in prison afterwards he broke down and confessed to her what he had done. The police were then called to pursue matters further in an attempt to find Kate's body.Odd then that the dog didn't alert in the two places that we know the corpse lay, only in one place that we have no evidence that it ever lay.
It is true that Kate was strangled in the shooting lodge which was a short distance from the family home. Prout had a history of violence towards his wife and attempted to strangle her on another occasion. It was following this earlier assault that Kate said she wanted a divorce and her share of their combined assets. It was after this that Prout formulated the plan to get rid of his wife.
It has never been made public whether the killing of Kate Prout in the shooting lodge was premeditated or as a result of yet another heated argumet which turned violent. All that we know is that Prout strangled her and wrapped her body in some plastic sheeting and rolled it up in curtains taken from the lodge. Prout placed the body in the back of his Land Rover while he went to the pub. He later used one of his mechanical excavators to dig a deep hole in the pheasant pens where he buried Kate's body. It has never been revealed whether her body was taken into the farm bungalow but then why would he?
The period of time between the strangulation and the burial was more than sufficient for cadaverine to form and thereafter contaminate everything it came into contact with including Adrian Prout and his clothing.
Odd then that the dog didn't alert in the two places that we know the corpse lay, only in one place that we have no evidence that it ever lay.
Depends if he moved the body quickly after death into the boot of his Land Rover.The body lay in his Land Rover which he drove to the pub, where he spent the evening drinking and then home again to find a place to bury the body. No dog alert in the Land Rover.
"Rex 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."
The body lay in his Land Rover which he drove to the pub, where he spent the evening drinking and then home again to find a place to bury the body. No dog alert in the Land Rover.
Eddie searched the home as shown in the documentary. I've read nothing about him searching the Land Rover.I'm sure he searched other places that just the house, don't you think? Or do you think the police didn't bother with land, outhouses and vehicles? That would be very remiss of them don't you think?
What is your best guesstimate of the suitcase dimensions please, Pegasus?By scaling from object of known dimension: about 51cm high x about 32cm wide IMO Misty. Next the length can be guesstimated by observing that luggage of this type typically has length = about 1.5 times height, so about 75cm long. IMO net capacity about 100 litres.
Eddie searched the home as shown in the documentary. I've read nothing about him searching the Land Rover.
Have you read anything about the landrover?
I think it was (firmly) established (following Prout's conviction) that Kate's body never was ....Ferryman are you completely trusting of the detailed accuracy of the confession of someone who repeatedly lied?
Ferryman are you completely trusting of the detailed accuracy of the confession of someone who repeatedly lied?
No, of course I'm not (although, having confessed to murdering Kate, I can't think why he would lie about anything else). We're discussing whether Eddie was ever put in the Landrover.Do you agree that after the combined pub and digging excursion, AP returned to the house?
Can't find anything to confirm either way.
Do you agree that after the combined pub and digging excursion, AP returned to the house?
It could be that there was no contamination of the Land Rover due to the remains being wrapped in plastic and in the curtains taken from the shooting lodge. As far as I recall the farm vehicles were all searched by the dogs early on and nothing untoward found.
On 5 February 2010, Adrian Prout was convicted of murdering his wife Kate and sentenced to serve a minimum of 18 years in prison.
Although Adrian and Kate were still technically married, they had in fact decided to divorce before Adrian reported her missing 5 days after he last saw her on the 5 November 2007.
Just days later, Adrian was arrested but released on bail and spent five weeks staying with Kate’s brother while the investigation carried out an extremely thorough and painstaking search of his home, farm and vehicles which were seized to be examined. Over 100 officers, a forensic team and a sniffer dog were involved but didn’t find Kate or any evidence suggesting where she could be.
I have spent some time listening to Richard D Hall's (RDH) documentary on MM "The True Story of Madeleine McCann. Buried By Mainstream Media ~ Richard D Hall". He tells us that the cadaver dog alerts are intelligence and needs to be backed by supporting evidence, yet then he makes assumptions that the cadaver dogs alerts are evidence that Madeleine had died in the apartment.
This is the complete contradiction of the original idea that the dog alerts are just intelligence. So his whole documentary fails on that point, for it seems to rely on the fact that Madeleine had died and her parents and their friends had simulated the abduction but they in fact had got rid of the body.
Tavares' report is also based on the same faulty deduction. RDH uses this report like it has been a proven fact but Tavares de Almeida has the same basic fault of turning intelligence into a evidential fact. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm
Tavares' report is, indeed, what most people mean and are referring to when they say Amaral's book is 'based on the files'
It's based (in large part) on Tavares' report.
It still mangles and misrepresents Harrison, Prior, the FSS and much else.
IYO
The reliability of the dogs (whether in another case or not), the competence of the handler, and the procedures used in all the searches in the McCann case are all valid topics for debate within a dog-thread.
Provided, of course, assertions are supported by evidence, which allows the forum to debate whether the evidence cited really is evidence.
at least everyone has to accept that the alerts are not evidence
Why?
Judges in this country have allowed dog alerts as evidence.
I posted about it several months ago on here with appropriate links etc.
Why?
Judges in this country have allowed dog alerts as evidence.
I posted about it several months ago on here with appropriate links etc.
so you maintain the alerts are evidence which contradicts the experts......i havent seen waht you claim
Cadaver-dog alerts are not evidence, unless there is corroborating forensic evidence found in the wake of the dogs' alerts.
Here we go again. As I recall that is what you said first time out.
I'll reply as I did at that time:
"Show us in judges rules etc where there is a delineation of dogs"
Judges rules?
Harrison and Grime both state that uncorroborated cadaver-dog alerts are intelligence, not evidence.
That'll do.
So a couple of expert witnesses can overrule a judge?
Now that is an interesting proposition.
Go away.
I know what you're talking about.
You pulled up some example of where the alert of a tracker dog was admissible as evidence in court.
Completely different sniffer-dog discipline than that of a cadaver dog.
In the Kate Prout case, the cadaver-dog alert was not used as evidence in court, because there was no corroborating evidence.
That is the position in English Courts.
Long has been ....
Why should I ?.
You have yet to show where there is discrimination of dogs in English Law.
I have.
Unless you think Harrison and Grime neither know what they are talking about?
Harrison and Grime as arbiters of English Law, hmmm.
at least everyone has to accept that the alerts are not evidenceThe tricky thing is even if there are 19 incidences of dog alerts (as claimed by HiDeHo) that still doesn't turn the dog alert intelligence into evidential fact. I have trouble saying that but what I'm trying to say, is that these 19 alerts, by Eddie and Keela, can't be turned around and used as "proof" that Madeleine died in the apartment, that the parents and friends hid the body and that Madeleine's cadaver was moved in the hire car months later.
The tricky thing is even if there are 19 incidences of dog alerts (as claimed by HiDeHo) that still doesn't turn the dog alert intelligence into evidential fact. I have trouble saying that but what I'm trying to say, is that these 19 alerts, by Eddie and Keela, can't be turned around and used as "proof" that Madeleine died in the apartment, that the parents and friends hid the body and that Madeleine's cadaver was moved in the hire car months later.
Why?If you could find that again that would be very useful, for it would be further evidence that a lot of important players have made the same error. It is very tempting to turn the number of alerts, and their distribution (behind sofa, cupboards, gardens, cars and clothing), even if the distribution seems to tell a story, you can't make it into a factual story. OK it can be a hypothesis, I have no problem about that, but that hypothesis needs corroborating evidence to back it up.
Judges in this country have allowed dog alerts as evidence.
I posted about it several months ago on here with appropriate links etc.
I have.Harrison and Grime independently, and together, should understand what dog alerts mean better than any Judge .... especially Harrison
Unless you think Harrison and Grime neither know what they are talking about?
Here we go again. As I recall that is what you said fridt time out.Your recent posts seem a little disjointed Alice.
I'll reply as I did at that time:
"Show us in judges rules etc where there is a delineation of dogs"
There is a wealth of additional background information that could be added to that.Was that "additional background information" used as a type of circumstantial evidence? Is "circumstantial evidence" sufficient to become evidence to enable inferences to be made from the dog alerts?
But it's broadly right.
Your recent posts seem a little disjointed Alice.
If you could find that again that would be very useful, for it would be further evidence that a lot of important players have made the same error. It is very tempting to turn the number of alerts, and their distribution (behind sofa, cupboards, gardens, cars and clothing), even if the distribution seems to tell a story, you can't make it into a factual story. OK it can be a hypothesis, I have no problem about that, but that hypothesis needs corroborating evidence to back it up.
Even if future corroborating forensic evidence goes against the McCanns it still does not mean that it was right to preempt that evidence. That is what RDH seems to do the Zapota case. You can't predict the future like that, as future corroborating forensic evidence could go for or against the dog alert intelligence, even if Eddie has a impressive track record no one can name the cadaver until the corroborating forensic evidence turns up.
So the options we are left with the cadaver alerts were:
1. To Madeleine's cadaver
2. To someone else's cadaver
I would back Eddie as having very likely giving us intelligence of a cadaver.
(Even if Gerry McCann says the evidence he saw showed "cadaver dogs were unreliable", Eddie on his own was very reliable in picking that there had been previous presence of cadaver material (body or body parts).)
Bar human remains there is NO SUCH THING as corroboratng evidence for eddies alerts
Some would have us believe that if no human remains are found then they should just shrug their shoulders and move on.
Some would have us believe that if no human remains are found then they should just shrug their shoulders and move on.
That is the (official!) position.
If you believe that, then there is no point in discussing.
That is the (official!) position.
Bar human remains there is NO SUCH THING as corroboratng evidence for eddies alertsThere was NO corroboration in any way to Eddies alerts.
Trawl through my posts then it's there somewhere unless the delayed aberrant eraser has been at it again.How long ago would you have posted it?
I am only here for the craic.
How long ago would you have posted it?
There was NO corroboration in any way to Eddies alerts.
As far as we are aware, Keela was NOT shown the things that Eddie (supposedly) alerted to.
It was essential that SHE was shown the things that Eddie alerted to.
1) If she also alerted then they were both alerting to decaying blood from a living person
2) Is she was shown the things Eddie alerted to, BUT she did not, then it was possible that it was cadaver odour.
However, it appears from videos and reports that she was not shown the things that Eddie alerted to, so no conclusions could be properly made as to what he was alerting to ... and but for Amarals fertile imagination nobody would have thought Cadaver Odour at all.
The whole thing is a nonsense. A huge myth based upon Amarals fertile imagination IMO
Bar human remains there is NO SUCH THING as corroborating evidence for eddie's alertsThat is true but as a detective one would use the intelligence gained to either encourage a confession or to possibly point to where the body could have gone next. (I have thought the next place would be to an funeral home where they could embalm the body.) I wonder if Amaral thought along the same line? Where did he think the McCann's took the cadaver (whoever it was) if they had it in the back of the rental car? From memory there is talk of travelling to Spain.
Sometime within the last year I would guess.What word would be in the post, like a particular key word that you recall please?
If it was the subject of an attack by the delayed eraser then it has gorn for good.
It was fun at the time so onward and upward. There will always be more corporation flags and mill ponds to lob them into... 8(>((
There was NO corroboration in any way to Eddies alerts.
As far as we are aware, Keela was NOT shown the things that Eddie (supposedly) alerted to.
It was essential that SHE was shown the things that Eddie alerted to.
1) If she also alerted then they were both alerting to decaying blood from a living person
2) Is she was shown the things Eddie alerted to, BUT she did not, then it was possible that it was cadaver odour.
However, it appears from videos and reports that she was not shown the things that Eddie alerted to, so no conclusions could be properly made as to what he was alerting to ... and but for Amarals fertile imagination nobody would have thought Cadaver Odour at all.
The whole thing is a nonsense. A huge myth based upon Amarals fertile imagination IMO
That is true but as a detective one would use the intelligence gained to either encourage a confession or to possibly point to where the body could have gone next. (I have thought the next place would be to an funeral home where they could embalm the body.) I wonder if Amaral thought along the same line? Where did he think the McCann's took the cadaver (whoever it was) if they had it in the back of the rental car? From memory there is talk of travelling to Spain.
That is true but as a detective one would use the intelligence gained to either encourage a confession or to possibly point to where the body could have gone next. (I have thought the next place would be to an funeral home where they could embalm the body.) I wonder if Amaral thought along the same line? Where did he think the McCann's took the cadaver (whoever it was) if they had it in the back of the rental car? From memory there is talk of travelling to Spain.Kindly look up the requirements for conducting a funeral, for cremating a body, for re-patriating a dead person to the UK.
Sadie still spreading myths that keela didnt examine the alert areas of eddie aka wardrobe in mccanns apt and clothes when videos were already provided to her a fee days ago is disgustingWe have videos of the apartment searches and the clothes searches in the gym.
Btw sadie there is no corroborating evidence for dead body scent why do so many prople fail to get that in their grey matter
We have videos of the apartment searches and the clothes searches in the gym.
Show me
(1) the places and articles that Eddie alerted to being shown to Keela ... and
(2) Keela NOT alerting to these places
Then I will agree there might be cadaver odour there, subject to Forensic testing.
Who knowsWhat from 5:00 - 10:00 PM What plus the help of their friends? What are you implying.
The mccanns had a 5 hour window of opportunity
Kindly look up the requirements for conducting a funeral, for cremating a body, for repatriating a dead person to the UK.Any other clues as to what to look up?
The details are many. The gist is simple. You get 48 hours.
Any other clues as to what to look up?I don't care. I have checked the regs on what happens if someone dies out here. The bottom line is you get 48 hours to sort it out.
It would be strange to have such a hard and fast time limit.
I don't care. I have checked the regs on what happens if someone dies out here. The bottom line is you get 48 hours to sort it out.What I meant was how do I find the reference to that law?
Relevance to Madeleine = body being cremated, because it was not going to hang about for long.
Relevance to me = I would need a funeral director very quickly, because the law does not allow one to delay.
Kindly look up the requirements for conducting a funeral, for cremating a body, for re-patriating a dead person to the UK.
The details are many. The gist is simple. You get 48 hours.
I don't care. I have checked the regs on what happens if someone dies out here. The bottom line is you get 48 hours to sort it out.
Relevance to Madeleine = body being cremated, because it was not going to hang about for long.
Relevance to me = I would need a funeral director very quickly, because the law does not allow one to delay.
Under normal circumstances, burial or cremation must take place within 72 hours of death and can only happen once the death has been reported.
48 hours to report a death. 72 for the funeral."Under normal circumstances, burial or cremation must take place in Portugal within 72 hours of death. Where there has been a post mortem examination, burial or cremation must be carried out within 48 hours of the body being released. The law does not specify a timescale for repatriation."
"Under normal circumstances, burial or cremation must take place in Portugal within 72 hours of death. Where there has been a post mortem examination, burial or cremation must be carried out within 48 hours of the body being released. The law does not specify a timescale for repatriation."
For those interested in the detail https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/514423/Death_Procedures_in_Portugal_September_2015.pdf
What from 5:00 - 10:00 PM What plus the help of their friends? What are you implying.nothing
nothing
Im saying that was the window of opportunity for anything, something many ignore
So stop resding into things and assuming thngs re friends ie stop putting words into others mouths
Who knows
The mccanns had a 5 hour window of opportunity
There was a strong implication, mercury. It was aimed at the Mccanns.Its not my fault there was a five hour window of opportunity for anything to have happened to madeleine without anyone knowing...after all her parents never checked she was even there
You said:
Reply #304 on: October 18, 2016, 10:38:58 PM »
Watch the libel Laws.
Its not my fault there was a five hour window of opportunity for anything to have happened to madeleine without anyone knowing...after all her parents never checked she was even thereThat's being silly isn't it? Gerry says they tucked the kids into bed. What time are you talking about?
Its not my fault there was a five hour window of opportunity for anything to have happened to madeleine without anyone knowing...after all her parents never checked she was even there
Mary and Martin Smith, from Ireland, told police they saw a man carrying a child matching Madeleine’s description at around 10pm on Rua da Escola Primaria, 500 yards from the McCanns’ apartment. He was heading towards the beach, did not look like a tourist and did not seem comfortable carrying the child, they said.
Their evidence was compelling, but it was only in October 2013 that two e-fit images of the man, compiled by police from descriptions given by Mr and Mrs Smith, were released by Scotland Yard to coincide with a BBC Crimewatch reconstruction of Madeleine’s disappearance. He remains a suspect.
Confirmation from that article that Martin Smith and his wife Mary produced the efits of the man the family all saw that night:Is that really possible to carry a true image of a person for that length of time and not have it contaminated by the photos of Gerry in the papers etc in the meantime?
Also confirmation that both have long, since, recanted of the view that the man the family all saw that night was Gerry.
It is obviously plain barking to suppose either would produce an efit of a man either thought was Gerry.
Is that really possible to carry a true image of a person for that length of time and not have it contaminated by the photos of Gerry in the papers etc in the meantime?
And there are two efits of quite different looking men, so what do you do? Even if one looked like one of them and thought of owning up you could just say "I don't look like the other", and not present yourself to SY.
Try producing a visual reproduction of a complete stranger you saw weeks ago.That's exactly what I mean "how is it done?". One of them could be very accurate especially if they knew the person. Like he knew it wasn't Robert Murat, and he thought by the way the child was being carried it was Gerry. So do they know more than they are letting on? The Smiths frequented Praia da Luz and so might "Smithman". It is possible the Smiths saw him again and refreshed their memory.
It's bloody hard.
Try producing a visual reproduction of a complete stranger you saw weeks ago.I've been in the position of trying to identify a thief who I partially apprehended, but he pushed past me partially knocking me down the stairs (no injuries) and ran off with my purse. The police drove me at breakneck speed to Central Birmingham Police station and actually showed me photos of men who they had stored images of. I think they were all thieves, but I am not sure of that.
It's bloody hard.
That's being silly isn't it? Gerry says they tucked the kids into bed. What time are you talking about?It doesnt matter what anyone said in the cintext of there being a long timeline where there were no witnesses
It doesnt matter what anyone said in the cintext of there being a long timeline where there were no witnessesDo we start doubting Matt as well then? There were no witnesses to his visit to the McCann's apartment.
Do we start doubting Matt as well then? There were no witnesses to his visit to the McCann's apartment.
I don't think it is unreasonable to question how his check took place. He didn't see Madeleine.yes that is true but he went into the main bedroom and Madeleine wasn't in there. So he at least worked out where she was "sleeping" by elimination.
yes that is true but he went into the main bedroom and Madeleine wasn't in there. So he at least worked out where she was "sleeping" by elimination.
But didn't check?So he said.