Anectdotal witness evidence

[Mr Gray]

Unlicenced police dogs were deemed incompetent by ACPO. As Eddie and Keela weren't police dogs they weren't required (or even eligible?) to be licenced.

Prof Cassella deems any cadaver dog not trained solely on human remains as being unreliable.  All other scent dogs are trained solely on one scent

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Evidence is anything that supports, a proposition..

So first it's unlikely grime didn't read details.. Or be told details... Of the case and second because if the alerts were blind that would be absolutely sensational and would have been discussed

Wasn't Grime flown over from the USA to Portugal. Having lived for a short time in the USA in the 90's, news of a missing British girl in Portugal would not have been major news in USA imo. I was in England and I could not have told you which apartment the McCanns stayed in.
But to be frank your two pieces of evidence are suppositions not evidence. Anyone can make a supposition about virtually anything, does not make it evidence.

[Mr Gray]

Wasn't Grime flown over from the USA to Portugal. Having lived for a short time in the USA in the 90's, news of a missing British girl in Portugal would not have been major news in USA imo. I was in England and I could not have told you which apartment the McCanns stayed in.
But to be frank your two pieces of evidence are suppositions not evidence. Anyone can make a supposition about virtually anything, does not make it evidence.

They are evidence.. Based on rational thought

[Icanhandlethetruth]

They are evidence.. Based on rational thought

A supposition is not evidence.

[Mr Gray]

A supposition is not evidence.

My evidence is based on facts. Are you really suggesting no one has thought to mention grime did not know 5a, was, a crime scene.. It would be absolute dynamite

[Icanhandlethetruth]

My evidence is based on facts. Are you really suggesting no one has thought to mention grime did not know 5a, was, a crime scene.. It would be absolute dynamite

Your evidence is supposition. Pure and simple. So it would be dynamite if t was revealed that Grime did not know which apartment was which. But he wasn't told which car was which and that's not dynamite at all.
Why would the PJ not tell him who's car was whose but tell him who's apartment was who's?
Now I don't claim to know if he was indeed told or not, but there is no evidence to show he was told which apt was which.

[Mr Gray]

Your evidence is supposition. Pure and simple. So it would be dynamite if t was revealed that Grime did not know which apartment was which. But he wasn't told which car was which and that's not dynamite at all.
Why would the PJ not tell him who's car was whose but tell him who's apartment was who's?
Now I don't claim to now if he was indeed told or not, but there is no evidence to show he was told which apt was which.

Grime claimed he was not aware that the renaukt belinged to the mccanns yet the car had posters of Maddie in the windows. He also claimed the dog showed an immediate interest in the car whereas the vudeo showed he trotted straight past

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Grime claimed he was not aware that the renaukt belinged to the mccanns yet the car had posters of Maddie in the windows. He also claimed the dog showed an immediate interest in the car whereas the vudeo showed he trotted straight past

Yes but there were no posters in the apartment.
The car search was undertaken as a blind search so why are you so sure that the apartment search wasn't. If they did one search as a blind search is it not more likely that both searches were blind searches. There simply is no evidence to suggest the apartment search was not a blind search.

[Mr Gray]

Yes but there were no posters in the apartment.
The car search was undertaken as a blind search so why are you so sure that the apartment search wasn't. If they did one search as a blind search is it not more likely that both searches were blind searches. There simply is no evidence to suggest the apartment search was not a blind search.

You are making suppositions....if the apartment search was blind.. Then the mccanns are guilty most likely of hidng a body.. Same goes for the car.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

You are making suppositions....if the apartment search was blind.. Then the mccanns are guilty most likely of hidng a body.. Same goes for the car.

Yes I am making suppositions but the difference is I am not claiming that it is evidence. It is purely a supposition.
I already posted a few minutes ago that

Now I don't claim to know if he was indeed told or not, but there is no evidence to show he was told which apt was which

[G-Unit]

You are making suppositions....if the apartment search was blind.. Then the mccanns are guilty most likely of hidng a body.. Same goes for the car.

You seem to be saying that Grime influenced the dogs. There's absolutely no evidence of that imo.

[Mr Gray]

Yes I am making suppositions but the difference is I am not claiming that it is evidence. It is purely a supposition.
I already posted a few minutes ago that

Now I don't claim to know if he was indeed told or not, but there is no evidence to show he was told which apt was which

I'm claiming the points I've raised as evidence  and I stand by that.  It's of no importance..
What you are suggesting doesn't fir with the facts

[Icanhandlethetruth]

I'm claiming the points I've raised as evidence  and I stand by that.  It's of no importance..
What you are suggesting doesn't fir with the facts

If you can't see that a supposition is not evidence, then I don't know what else I can say.

[Mr Gray]

You seem to be saying that Grime influenced the dogs. There's absolutely no evidence of that imo.

I'm simply stating facts. Do you think the alerts have the same value whether the searches were blind or not... They clearly dont

[Mr Gray]

If you can't see that a supposition is not evidence, then I don't know what else I can say.

The claim that the search was blind has never been raised despite it's colossal importance.. That's a fact.. Not a supposition