Author Topic: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?  (Read 267448 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1530 on: July 13, 2020, 12:00:25 PM »
If you don’t believe the 2017 Independent report cited is the official one please give us a link to what you believe is an official version. You know as well as I do that human bones were found at HdlG. What was never proven was any evidence for murder against the victims of the well documented and tragic abuse that occurred there.

The official report does not say there was collagen in the coconut...I don't think the official report mentions human bones either


Provide a cite to support your claims

Offline Lace

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1531 on: July 13, 2020, 12:05:17 PM »
How would that affect any evidence...that he was not licenced

I would think that if the licence had expired Grime should have had his dogs examined to see if they were up to the job he was claiming they could do.   If they passed then he would get his licence,  though I don't know how they go about it.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1532 on: July 13, 2020, 12:06:27 PM »
I would think that if the licence had expired Grime should have had his dogs examined to see if they were up to the job he was claiming they could do.   If they passed then he would get his licence,  though I don't know how they go about it.

Totally unprofessional

Offline G-Unit

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1533 on: July 13, 2020, 12:27:58 PM »
Have aread of this and you will see why I refer to Grimes involvement at HDLG as a debacle. almost 100K and nothing of any use found.


https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Operation%20Rectangle%20review%20of%20the%20efficient%20and%20effective%20use%20of%20resources%20201005%20BDO%20Alto.pdf

This report was produced by a firm of chartered accountants aided by a retired policeman. The objective of the Review was "to provide an independent and objective opinion on the financial and governance controls in place
in respect of the HCAE investigation in order to provide assurance to the Accounting Officer and Minister that resources have been used efficiently and effectively.

It was not within their remit to examine or comment on Grime's capabilities, and they weren't qualified to do so.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1534 on: July 13, 2020, 12:31:48 PM »
This report was produced by a firm of chartered accountants aided by a retired policeman. The objective of the Review was "to provide an independent and objective opinion on the financial and governance controls in place
in respect of the HCAE investigation in order to provide assurance to the Accounting Officer and Minister that resources have been used efficiently and effectively.

It was not within their remit to examine or comment on Grime's capabilities, and they weren't qualified to do so.

The review included a highly experienced policeman....the review was highly critical of Grimes unlicenced  invovement. Did he just forget to renew his licence...highly unprofessional

Offline G-Unit

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1535 on: July 13, 2020, 01:53:07 PM »
The review included a highly experienced policeman....the review was highly critical of Grimes unlicenced  invovement. Did he just forget to renew his licence...highly unprofessional


We are not qualified to comment with any authority on what effect, if any, Mr Grime’s lack of ACPO accreditation and the fact that his dogs’ licences had expired, made on operations at Haut de la Garenne, and this is outside the scope of this Review in any event.
https://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocuments/Government%20and%20administration/R%20Operation%20Rectangle%20review%20of%20the%20efficient%20and%20effective%20use%20of%20resources%20201005%20BDO%20Alto.pdf
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1536 on: July 13, 2020, 02:13:34 PM »
The official report does not say there was collagen in the coconut...I don't think the official report mentions human bones either


Provide a cite to support your claims

I have done and posted a link to the 2017 official report. It confirms that human bones were found and does claim the “skull” was NOT bone. It does not however account for the collagen from the earlier report. It just vaguely asserts it wasn’t human without giving evidence. That’s not the point though! The coconut / skull had just one specimen. Human bones were found and Eddie was correct with his alert.

Offline Brietta

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1537 on: July 13, 2020, 02:14:07 PM »
Press conference notes from Operation Rectangle update
Press Release : Operation Rectangle

Snip

It is also essential, however, to ensure that the facts are reported properly.

An assessment of the evidence available has revealed that the forensic recoveries do not indicate that there have been murders of children or other people at Haut de la Garenne.  Nor is it believed that the evidence indicates that bodies have been destroyed, buried or hidden at Haut de la Garenne.

Should any further evidence come to light, this will be assessed, and whatever action is necessary will be taken.

The Deputy Chief Officer, David Warcup, stated:

"It is unfortunate that we now believe that the information which was put into the public domain by the States of Jersey Police about certain ˜finds' at Haut de la Garenne was inaccurate, and we regret this.

With regard to the particular evidence which has been highlighted in the media, the States of Jersey Police are clear that these do not support suggestions that there have been murders at Haut de la Garenne.  In particular;

A Piece of Child's Skull

 An anthropologist made an initial identification as this item being a piece of child's skull.
 At 10:45 am the SIO made a decision to release information to the press about the find.
 At 2pm the same day a press conference disclosed this item as the finding of the potential remains of a child.
 This item was lying within earth that is now identified as being Victorian era.
 On the 31st March 2008 Dr Higham from the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit stated he believed the item was not bone.
 The original anthropologist reviewed her initial identification and on 14th April 2008 had stated she no longer identified it as part of a skull.
 Dr Higham and Dr Jacobi (of the British Museum faunal specialist) concluded that the sample was not in fact bone, but was almost certainly wood.  They went further stating it was more like a part of a seed casing like a small piece of coconut.
 The conclusions are therefore that the sample is a) Not bone and b) Not human.
 The States of Jersey Police satisfied that having liaised with the anthropologist and Dr Higham and other experts, that this item is not human and was found in a Victorian context.

˜Shackles' and ˜Restraints':

The item referred to as ˜Shackles' was found in rubble on the ground floor of HDLG on 28th February. These are in fact rusty pieces of metal. There is no witness evidence or intelligence which indicates these should be described as shackles or that shackles resembling this description have been used during the commission of any offences.

The item called a ˜restraint' was found amongst general debris in an under floor area. However, there is no evidence or intelligence indicating this is anything suspicious.

The Bath and blood stains:

This bath in the under floor voids has no water supply and has not been used as a bath since the 1920's when a brick pillar was constructed within it. During the search a specialist search dog reacted to the bath and a presumptive test indicated positive for blood in a minute area of the bath.  Following detailed forensic microscopic examination no blood has been found.  There is nothing suspicious about the bath and no indication this bath has been used in the commission of any offences.


The Cellars

These are floor voids.  They are not cellars, and it is impossible for a grown person to stand up straight in the floor voids under Haut de la Garenne.

Teeth

There are 65 teeth found in the floor voids and 1 elsewhere. They are milk teeth coming from at least 10 people - up to a maximum of 65 people. Around 45 of the teeth originate from children aged 9 to 12 yrs and 20 from the range 6 to 8 years.
There is wear on some of the teeth; these teeth generally have the appearance of being shed naturally.

It is possible for more tests to be done on the teeth to clarify age and other factors.

Bones

170 pieces of bone which are mainly animal were found in the area of HDLG which was searched. Many more pieces of bone were found in the area of the grounds, all of which are animal.

 Of all that material, there are 3 fragments which are ˜possibly' human; the biggest piece is 25 mm long.
 2 fragments date 1470 to 1650 and the other 1650 to 1950
 These have not definitely been identified as human bone. Taking in all this information, this is an unexplained find if it is human, but not necessarily suspicious.

The Pits

These were dug in the late 1970s and are unexplained, but nothing suspicious has been found in either of them.

In summary;

 No people are reported missing
 There are no allegations of murder
 There are no suspects for murder
 There is no specific time period for murder.
  We are satisfied that there is no indication or evidence that there have been murders at HDLG.


 The Deputy Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police, David Warcup stated, "I continue to have every confidence in the detectives and investigators who are currently working on the historical abuse enquiry.  The have worked extremely hard in their search for the truth and to bring offenders to justice.

https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/november/press-conference-notes-from-operation-rectangle-update/

"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1538 on: July 13, 2020, 02:41:24 PM »
I have done and posted a link to the 2017 official report. It confirms that human bones were found and does claim the “skull” was NOT bone. It does not however account for the collagen from the earlier report. It just vaguely asserts it wasn’t human without giving evidence. That’s not the point though! The coconut / skull had just one specimen. Human bones were found and Eddie was correct with his alert.

He certainly was:

"These have not definitely been identified as human bone. Taking in all this information, this is an unexplained find if it is human, but not necessarily suspicious".

*****************************************************************************************

Looking at this report conclusion is worrying. Not going off topic - just thinking about the summary report.

In summary;

 No people are reported missing-  they were orphans brought from the mainland- who would report
 There are no allegations of murder- murdered people don't make allegations
 There are no suspects for murder - well if none were reported... meh
 There is no specific time period for murder.
  We are satisfied that there is no indication or evidence that there have been murders at HDLG.

The pit and the restraints,shackles =alarm bells.  Maybe the bodies were buried at sea?


'Never underestimate the power of stupid people'... George Carlin

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1539 on: July 13, 2020, 02:48:36 PM »
Press conference notes from Operation Rectangle update
Press Release : Operation Rectangle

Snip

It is also essential, however, to ensure that the facts are reported properly.

An assessment of the evidence available has revealed that the forensic recoveries do not indicate that there have been murders of children or other people at Haut de la Garenne.  Nor is it believed that the evidence indicates that bodies have been destroyed, buried or hidden at Haut de la Garenne.

Should any further evidence come to light, this will be assessed, and whatever action is necessary will be taken.

The Deputy Chief Officer, David Warcup, stated:

"It is unfortunate that we now believe that the information which was put into the public domain by the States of Jersey Police about certain ˜finds' at Haut de la Garenne was inaccurate, and we regret this.

With regard to the particular evidence which has been highlighted in the media, the States of Jersey Police are clear that these do not support suggestions that there have been murders at Haut de la Garenne.  In particular;

A Piece of Child's Skull

 An anthropologist made an initial identification as this item being a piece of child's skull.
 At 10:45 am the SIO made a decision to release information to the press about the find.
 At 2pm the same day a press conference disclosed this item as the finding of the potential remains of a child.
 This item was lying within earth that is now identified as being Victorian era.
 On the 31st March 2008 Dr Higham from the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit stated he believed the item was not bone.
 The original anthropologist reviewed her initial identification and on 14th April 2008 had stated she no longer identified it as part of a skull.
 Dr Higham and Dr Jacobi (of the British Museum faunal specialist) concluded that the sample was not in fact bone, but was almost certainly wood.  They went further stating it was more like a part of a seed casing like a small piece of coconut.
 The conclusions are therefore that the sample is a) Not bone and b) Not human.
 The States of Jersey Police satisfied that having liaised with the anthropologist and Dr Higham and other experts, that this item is not human and was found in a Victorian context.

˜Shackles' and ˜Restraints':

The item referred to as ˜Shackles' was found in rubble on the ground floor of HDLG on 28th February. These are in fact rusty pieces of metal. There is no witness evidence or intelligence which indicates these should be described as shackles or that shackles resembling this description have been used during the commission of any offences.

The item called a ˜restraint' was found amongst general debris in an under floor area. However, there is no evidence or intelligence indicating this is anything suspicious.

The Bath and blood stains:

This bath in the under floor voids has no water supply and has not been used as a bath since the 1920's when a brick pillar was constructed within it. During the search a specialist search dog reacted to the bath and a presumptive test indicated positive for blood in a minute area of the bath.  Following detailed forensic microscopic examination no blood has been found.  There is nothing suspicious about the bath and no indication this bath has been used in the commission of any offences.


The Cellars

These are floor voids.  They are not cellars, and it is impossible for a grown person to stand up straight in the floor voids under Haut de la Garenne.

Teeth

There are 65 teeth found in the floor voids and 1 elsewhere. They are milk teeth coming from at least 10 people - up to a maximum of 65 people. Around 45 of the teeth originate from children aged 9 to 12 yrs and 20 from the range 6 to 8 years.
There is wear on some of the teeth; these teeth generally have the appearance of being shed naturally.

It is possible for more tests to be done on the teeth to clarify age and other factors.

Bones

170 pieces of bone which are mainly animal were found in the area of HDLG which was searched. Many more pieces of bone were found in the area of the grounds, all of which are animal.

 Of all that material, there are 3 fragments which are ˜possibly' human; the biggest piece is 25 mm long.
 2 fragments date 1470 to 1650 and the other 1650 to 1950
 These have not definitely been identified as human bone. Taking in all this information, this is an unexplained find if it is human, but not necessarily suspicious.

The Pits

These were dug in the late 1970s and are unexplained, but nothing suspicious has been found in either of them.

In summary;

 No people are reported missing
 There are no allegations of murder
 There are no suspects for murder
 There is no specific time period for murder.
  We are satisfied that there is no indication or evidence that there have been murders at HDLG.


 The Deputy Chief Officer of the States of Jersey Police, David Warcup stated, "I continue to have every confidence in the detectives and investigators who are currently working on the historical abuse enquiry.  The have worked extremely hard in their search for the truth and to bring offenders to justice.

https://jersey.police.uk/news-appeals/2008/november/press-conference-notes-from-operation-rectangle-update/
That’s a press release from 2008 not the official report. The report from 2017 states there were human bones there. Why do you want to discredit the investigation so badly? Is it because the presence of bone proves that Eddie was correct or do you have some other interest in the case? Genuine question! Thanks.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1540 on: July 13, 2020, 03:11:13 PM »
That’s a press release from 2008 not the official report. The report from 2017 states there were human bones there. Why do you want to discredit the investigation so badly? Is it because the presence of bone proves that Eddie was correct or do you have some other interest in the case? Genuine question! Thanks.

Could you provide an official report that confirms human bones...its about the third time I've asked

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1541 on: July 13, 2020, 03:15:48 PM »
I have done and posted a link to the 2017 official report. It confirms that human bones were found and does claim the “skull” was NOT bone. It does not however account for the collagen from the earlier report. It just vaguely asserts it wasn’t human without giving evidence. That’s not the point though! The coconut / skull had just one specimen. Human bones were found and Eddie was correct with his alert.

this is what you posted..

The The Report of the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry 2017 confirms that bone fragments were found at HDLG:

" In May 2008,further specimens, including children's milk teeth and bone fragments,underwent forensic testing. Subsequently, no findings emerged that warranted the launch of a homicide investigation"



that says bone fragmnets not human bone

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1542 on: July 13, 2020, 03:42:16 PM »
this is what you posted..

The The Report of the Independent Jersey Care Inquiry 2017 confirms that bone fragments were found at HDLG:

" In May 2008,further specimens, including children's milk teeth and bone fragments,underwent forensic testing. Subsequently, no findings emerged that warranted the launch of a homicide investigation"



that says bone fragmnets not human bone

Fair point... but neither does it say they weren’t human.


Offline Mr Gray

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1543 on: July 13, 2020, 04:06:16 PM »
Fair point... but neither does it say they weren’t human.

What a rubbish answer

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #1544 on: July 13, 2020, 04:25:38 PM »
What a rubbish answer

But true isn’t it Dave. You can’t show they weren’t human bone fragments.