Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?

[Brietta]

You've lost me a bit there ... the point being made was that a violent rapist was given a suspended sentence ...

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

Dog alertrs are BS and not admissible....

We know they're not admissable... but neither are they BS (as you and the FBI and forensic scientists all know!!). They lead CSI's to areas where they may find evidence of a crime. In the case of MM they led to the collection of "human cellular material".

[Eleanor]

We know they're not admissable... but neither are they BS (as you and the FBI and forensic scientists all know!!). They lead CSI's to areas where they may find evidence of a crime. In the case of MM they led to the collection of "human cellular material".

Wow.  Human Cellular Material found in a place occupied by humans.

[G-Unit]

Wow.  Human Cellular Material found in a place occupied by humans.

More specifically a crime scene, where something could be learned from such material.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

More specifically a crime scene, where something could be learned from such material.

And if the FSS couldn't actually identify the "human cellular material" then you do have to question their credentials somewhat.

[Eleanor]

More specifically a crime scene, where something could be learned from such material.

But wasn't.

[Mr Gray]

And if the FSS couldn't actually identify the "human cellular material" then you do have to question their credentials somewhat.

I think it was Perlin who pointed out with a very small sample ..you cannot do both...if you DNA analyse that's it.
They were only dealing with a few cells

[G-Unit]

But wasn't.

Not by the FSS, that's for sure.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

But wasn't.

Technology has moved on and the ineptitude of the FSS in this case, imo, doesn't need to be the end of the road for the DNA analysis. The FSS found it "inconclusive" but other forensic scientists may very well now be able to obtain conclusive results.

[Mr Gray]

We know they're not admissable... but neither are they BS (as you and the FBI and forensic scientists all know!!). They lead CSI's to areas where they may find evidence of a crime. In the case of MM they led to the collection of "human cellular material".

they did...in jersey they led to  coconut...some baby teeth..(grime now says the dogs dont alert to teeth)...and some bones.....none of which were confirmed as human.

my views on the dogs are that they are very good at finding human remains but both here and jersey this dog alerted where there wereno human remains

[Mr Gray]

Technology has moved on and the ineptitude of the FSS in this case, imo, doesn't need to be the end of the road for the DNA analysis. The FSS found it "inconclusive" but other forensic scientists may very well now be able to obtain conclusive results.

I think they may  have evidence which makes that dna unimportant...like images of maddie after she was abducted

[Carana]

And if the FSS couldn't actually identify the "human cellular material" then you do have to question their credentials somewhat.

Not with LCN.

The head of the Portuguese lab agreed with the FSS.

[sadie]

That was on the shelf, but what about the wall where Eddie seemed to alert IMO.  Was keela shown that?

I think that he actually alerted to the wall, fairly high up, but I admit that I haven't rechecked.  Too tired.

[sadie]

Yes Eddie alerted at the wardrobe and Keela was put inside.

Yep, but what about the wall where I think Eddie alerted, was Keela lifted up to that to have a sniff?

[G-Unit]

Yep, but what about the wall where I think Eddie alerted, was Keela lifted up to that to have a sniff?

If she wasn't then he probably didn't alert to a wall. He may have had his head up;

The first alert was given with the dogs head in the air without a positive area
being identified. This is the alert given by him when there is no tangible
evidence to be located only the remaining scent.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm