Dogs are at best only 90% accurate in ideal circumstances, less in the real world. Because two alerts/non-alerts are required, the maximum for such an ID is 80%. Dogs also make serial errors.
Some dogs are better than others in doing specific tasks, like human beings.
Agreed. None are better than 90% IRL.
Do you agree it builds a solid presumption about Madeleine dying in the flat ? This doesn't imply she died accidentally "on her own". A burglar might have unintentionally killed her trying to avoid her screaming. Then he would have disposed of her body, well aware he had left DNA on her. Of course he would have had to stay in the flat at least one hour...
I wondered about that. However, if she died in that apartment and was taken out quickly, how likely is it that Eddie reacted - three months later - to such a short accumulation of smell in an apartment in which dozens of people had been... including all the post-disappearance guests?
And don't forget one pre disappearance guest who cut himself shaving, bled for 45 minutes and paced the whole apartment trying to stem the flow of blood with tissue.
Recorded in the files, somewhere, is the length of time dog and handler spent in each apartment. The other 5 apartments were whistle-stop tours.
But in apartment 5a an inordinate amount of time was spent and a response (eventually) elicited.
Are we really to believe that apartment 5a was the only one where blood was spilt?
At that point if you doubt Martin Grime's words, there's no interest in going on.
Personally I find no motive for his lying when he said Eddie (not Keela) was excited at the entrance of the flat. Having trained his dog for years, MG understood there was something inside and let the dog run around freely. MG knew that without some forensic material Eddie's findings were of no use.
Remember the task is exhausting for the dog, it can't do it for hours without large periods of rest.
