Perhaps they were wrong too
What does 90% accurate mean....it means nothing without details of the, tests
I provided a link to the court of Michigan case, which included this;
"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."
Rex Stockham's scientific papers are available that detail his methods. His qualifications are known to the court, so obviously his statement did mean something to the court. The fact he oversaw the FBI's canine programme and instigated the training methods for the FBI as a whole in the US, obviously carries a bit of weight.
" A New Breed
Scent Dog Program Gets Results
Human scent evidence has been used in federal court before. However, the federal court judge’s ruling sets an important precedent—and by extension acknowledges the Bureau’s efforts to promote the highest standards when scent dogs are used in investigations.
The use of dogs by law enforcement is nothing new. Bloodhounds have traditionally been called upon to pick up the trail of fugitives and missing persons. FBI police and our special agent bomb technicians use dogs trained to sniff for explosives, and we have victim recovery dogs trained specifically to seek out the smell of blood and decomposing bodies.
But our Human Scent Evidence Team (HSET), established in 2002 and now a full-time program in the ERTU, is something of a new breed. After they are trained and certified—a process that can take two to three years—HSET dogs can help point investigators in the right direction when time and resources may be in limited supply—and their efforts may later be scrutinized in the courtroom.
Here’s how the program works:
At the crime scene, in addition to collecting fingerprints, DNA, and other evidence, ERT technicians collect scents by using a trace evidence vacuum similar to those used for collection of hair and fibers. Human scent traces, which can be obtained from almost any object, are vacuumed onto a sterile surgical dressing and placed in an airtight glass jar (they can be stored that way for an extended period of time).
Dogs are trained to smell the collected scent by sniffing the scent pad and indicating either a scent match or a non-match. If there is a matching trail of human odor, the dog will follow an invisible “odor highway” in the same way humans might recognize streets, roadways, and intersections.
In most cases handlers know nothing about the cases they are called in to work. They are simply given a scent pad and asked to follow a trail if one is found.
Stockham is working with the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies to establish a uniform set of training and certification standards that would apply to all scent dogs used in investigations.
“Our goal is to promote a science-driven program with the highest standards of training, certification, and professionalism,” Stockham explained. “It’s part of the FBI Laboratory’s commitment to provide exceptional forensic science services to our federal, state, local, and international law enforcement partners.”
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/stories/2010/december/scent_122310/scent_122310So people questioning Stockham's opinion are saying that a man in charge of implementing scientific standards across a whole country suddenly became biased and wanted to exaggerate things on behalf of Grime?
