The timeline revisited

[Mr Gray]

Dog alerts.
No body found.
Body found elsewhere.
Killer caught.
Killer confirms body was in place where dog alerted.

Would you like some examples? I'll provide cites where you never do.
Have you emailed Martin yet, or are you worried he won't understand your typing?

That again is anecdotal.... Grime claims in his white paper that the alerts need a scientific basis to ba accepted... He hasn't done thst yet.  As regards understanding my typing.. I dint think Grime is that bright but I dint think he's thick... Si I think he would understand  it.

You have given me an idea... I will email him on the anectdital point

[G-Unit]

It’s a bit rich to say supporters are “obsessed with it all” when the only reason Grime and his dogs are still being discussed 14 years later is because sceptics think his dogs are evidence of McCann involvement when clearly to anyone that actually matters they are not.  The world has moved on, sceptics have not, and cling to their “Dogs Don’t Lie” mantra for comfort.

On this forum I find it's mostly supporters who are interested in the dog alerts, just as they are the ones interested in discussing Amaral.

[Vertigo Swirl]

On this forum I find it's mostly supporters who are interested in the dog alerts, just as they are the ones interested in discussing Amaral.

Whilst you’re interested in picking holes in McCann and friends’ stratements so I guess that makes you obssessed with them.

[Mr Gray]

Dog alerts.
No body found.
Body found elsewhere.
Killer caught.
Killer confirms body was in place where dog alerted.

Would you like some examples? I'll provide cites where you never do.
Have you emailed Martin yet, or are you worried he won't understand your typing?

I've got about two min before leaving fir wirk so wint be correcting any typos

The question is if Eddie alerts.. Even ten times.. How sure can wevbe there, was a body previously present.. And on what evidence do you base thst conclusion.
Let's see if you can have an adult debate without the chidish digs... I regularly supply cites.  I've syoplied cites fir all my critisisms of Grime

[Brietta]

I've got no idea what 'sceptic tenets' are. I speak as I find, and having examined Grime, his work, his evidence and his career minutely (due to supporters being obsessed with it all), I can find nothing to arouse my suspicions. Baseless mud-slinging abounds, but there's no evidence.

That is an illogical post based on previous assertions of your ignorance.  You concede your lack of expertise disqualifies you from having and expressing an opinion - yet here you are voicing a very firm one.

You really like having it both ways don't you.

Also please desist from your accusations of on occasion "lying" and now the abundance of "mud-slinging" for which you have no evidence because it doesn't happen.  Members have posted only the facts of the matter which you must accept even if you don't appreciate them - so cut out the slurs.

[G-Unit]

That is an illogical post based on previous assertions of your ignorance.  You concede your lack of expertise disqualifies you from having and expressing an opinion - yet here you are voicing a very firm one.

You really like having it both ways don't you.

Also please desist from your accusations of on occasion "lying" and now the abundance of "mud-slinging" for which you have no evidence because it doesn't happen.  Members have posted only the facts of the matter which you must accept even if you don't appreciate them - so cut out the slurs.

I can't comment on how a search by CSI dogs should be conducted because I don't know enough to do so. Neither, in my opinion, does anyone else posting on here. Despite that, untold speculation has been posted.

One of the things Grime has been accused of is calling a disinterested Eddie back to the McCann's hire car. It has even been suggested that he did that because he knew it was their car. That's what I call a slur.

[Mr Gray]

 

I can't comment on how a search by CSI dogs should be conducted because I don't know enough to do so. Neither, in my opinion, does anyone else posting on here. Despite that, untold speculation has been posted.

One of the things Grime has been accused of is calling a disinterested Eddie back to the McCann's hire car. It has even been suggested that he did that because he knew it was their car. That's what I call a slur.

Eddie showed no interest in the mccanns car at least twice and was twice called back before alerting. Fact

Grime claimed he didn't know it was the McCanns car yet it was the only one with posters of Maddie... Fact

So you see what is the TRUTH as a slur.. You have obviously drswn your own conclusions

[Mr Gray]

On this forum I find it's mostly supporters who are interested in the dog alerts, just as they are the ones interested in discussing Amaral.

I think it's absolutely correct to be interested in what the PJ felt was the main evidence against the McCanns... When in realty there, are many reasons backed by evidence to dismiss them.
You are wrong yet again to think it's only supporters who are interested in them.. Totally wrong.

[Mr Gray]

I can't comment on how a search by CSI dogs should be conducted because I don't know enough to do so. Neither, in my opinion, does anyone else posting on here. Despite that, untold speculation has been posted.

One of the things Grime has been accused of is calling a disinterested Eddie back to the McCann's hire car. It has even been suggested that he did that because he knew it was their car. That's what I call a slur.

Cadaver dogs are no different from any other search dog.  When we see the digs at the airport they simply move down the conveyor belt and are not repeatedly called back.

Even the PJ observers were suprised that the dogs alerted to area they had previously shown no interest in. I think you need to wake up.

[Brietta]

I can't comment on how a search by CSI dogs should be conducted because I don't know enough to do so. Neither, in my opinion, does anyone else posting on here. Despite that, untold speculation has been posted.

One of the things Grime has been accused of is calling a disinterested Eddie back to the McCann's hire car. It has even been suggested that he did that because he knew it was their car. That's what I call a slur.

Indeed "untold speculation" has been posted here and elsewhere throughout the internet since Levy posted videos for the edification of his client base who adopted "the dogs don't lie" mantra and have kept it going ever since.

I have watched the video.

There was no mistaking the McCann hire car.  It was covered with posters of Madeleine.

I have watched Grime recalling Eddie to the car which he had previously 'inspected' then ignored.

I asked you previously had you seen the videos of the dogs in action.
Posts you have made - such as the one above - prompted the question.

Now I am asking you - how is it possible to call it a "SLUR" when recounting video evidence which is a statement of the fact that the event actually happened and was recorded for all to see".

Are we all to deny the evidence of our own eyes to bolster your misconception of events which has transmogrified them into a "slur" for you - or do you think Levy ran true to form and 'doctored' the video?

[G-Unit]

Eddie showed no interest in the mccanns car at least twice and was twice called back before alerting. Fact

Grime claimed he didn't know it was the McCanns car yet it was the only one with posters of Maddie... Fact

So you see what is the TRUTH as a slur.. You have obviously drswn your own conclusions

This is what Grime said;

"We examined the cars with the dog and the only reaction we got was in relation to the car in the extreme corner. I will indicate that it was the Renault. What we have is a reaction to this door here, where (the dog) lifts its head in the air and sniffs for the objects which it has been trained to detect. And when we limit our movements, the dog chooses this car, this door. It is important to know that the dog chooses the odour that comes from the lower part of the door. Based on this information, I will try to place the dog inside the car."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

I understand from that that Eddie's behaviour changed when he reached that area; namely by lifting his head and sniffing. Grime limits the dog's movements and he alerts.

Your reading of the situation differs from Grime's, but I think he knows his job and his dog better than you do.

[Brietta]

This is what Grime said;

"We examined the cars with the dog and the only reaction we got was in relation to the car in the extreme corner. I will indicate that it was the Renault. What we have is a reaction to this door here, where (the dog) lifts its head in the air and sniffs for the objects which it has been trained to detect. And when we limit our movements, the dog chooses this car, this door. It is important to know that the dog chooses the odour that comes from the lower part of the door. Based on this information, I will try to place the dog inside the car."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

I understand from that that Eddie's behaviour changed when he reached that area; namely by lifting his head and sniffing. Grime limits the dog's movements and he alerts.

Your reading of the situation differs from Grime's, but I think he knows his job and his dog better than you do.

What a ridiculous post.

We saw the dog "alerting" - and you did too.  You just cannot rely on the evidence of your own eyes.

[G-Unit]

What a ridiculous post.

We saw the dog "alerting" - and you did too.  You just cannot rely on the evidence of your own eyes.

I  saw what you saw. I chose to accept the handler's explanation and you, along with others, didn't. I can see no reason to reject the handler's explanation, and I'm certainly not going to do that on the say so of random posters on the internet.

[Vertigo Swirl]

This is what Grime said;

"We examined the cars with the dog and the only reaction we got was in relation to the car in the extreme corner. I will indicate that it was the Renault. What we have is a reaction to this door here, where (the dog) lifts its head in the air and sniffs for the objects which it has been trained to detect. And when we limit our movements, the dog chooses this car, this door. It is important to know that the dog chooses the odour that comes from the lower part of the door. Based on this information, I will try to place the dog inside the car."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

I understand from that that Eddie's behaviour changed when he reached that area; namely by lifting his head and sniffing. Grime limits the dog's movements and he alerts.

Your reading of the situation differs from Grime's, but I think he knows his job and his dog better than you do.

Grime also stated he didn’t know that the only car plastered with posters of Madeleine and which had been regularly featured on news clips of the McCanns movements post disappearance was the McCanns car.  So is he blind, completely switched off from current events or  being somewhat disingenuous (to put it mildly)?   Which do you think it is, eh? 

[Mr Gray]

I  saw what you saw. I chose to accept the handler's explanation and you, along with others, didn't. I can see no reason to reject the handler's explanation, and I'm certainly not going to do that on the say so of random posters on the internet.

I see lots if reasons not to accept Grimes explanation... First I think he has too much faith in his dogs.

I see no reason why he does not engage in proper scientific  tests.. Start by taking two independent dog teamsbto the site would be a good start.  He seems to put faith in anectdotal evidence... A clear red flag which diminishes his credibility