How many episodes of dog alerts were suggestive of cadaver odor?

[ferryman]

Hello to everyone.

In theory - I think any alert by Eddie alone could be suggestive of cadaver odour.

However, without evidence being found which can be forensically tested then .....

No-one can say whether the alert was to a recent or ancient deposit - so it cannot be 'dated'. 
 
No-one can say whether the alert was from odour emanating from above or below the ground - or even if it had drifted there from another source.

No-one can say whether it was an odour left by direct contact with a cadaver or an odour innocently transferred to that same place from elsewhere by any number of people or objects.

No-one can say whether the original source was decomposed pigmeat or human remains as the dogs cannot differentiate between the two.

No-one can say for sure that the dog had alerted in error or whether it was a genuine alert.

No-one can say for sure that the dog had alerted as a result of unconscious cueing - or not.

I have always presumed that it is because of these numerous variables that physical evidence capable of being forensically tested is absolutely essential  - in order for the 'alerts' to be regarded as evidence.   If nothing is found to corroberrate the alerts - then any of the above 'possibilities' could be the reason for an alert.



 

We know that Eddie alerted in an apartment where a man who cut himself shaving paced the apartment for 45 minutes trying to stem the flow of blood.

I didn't know that

...  which apartment was it ?

Apartment 5a

Mr John Paul Gordon.

Beg your pardon, Paul Anthony Gordon:

While we were in Portugal there were no incidents worthy of record, beyond this man that I have described, however there was one occasion when I cut myself shaving in the bathroom of the apartment. I would say that the cut bled for about 45 minutes and that it took some time until the cut stopped bleeding, during which period I walked around the apartment with paper tissues trying to stop the blood.

[sadie]

Well remembered ferryman.  


I knew it had happened, but I couldn't remember to whom

[icabodcrane]

Hello to everyone.

In theory - I think any alert by Eddie alone could be suggestive of cadaver odour.

However, without evidence being found which can be forensically tested then .....

No-one can say whether the alert was to a recent or ancient deposit - so it cannot be 'dated'. 
 
No-one can say whether the alert was from odour emanating from above or below the ground - or even if it had drifted there from another source.

No-one can say whether it was an odour left by direct contact with a cadaver or an odour innocently transferred to that same place from elsewhere by any number of people or objects.

No-one can say whether the original source was decomposed pigmeat or human remains as the dogs cannot differentiate between the two.

No-one can say for sure that the dog had alerted in error or whether it was a genuine alert.

No-one can say for sure that the dog had alerted as a result of unconscious cueing - or not.

I have always presumed that it is because of these numerous variables that physical evidence capable of being forensically tested is absolutely essential  - in order for the 'alerts' to be regarded as evidence.   If nothing is found to corroberrate the alerts - then any of the above 'possibilities' could be the reason for an alert.



 

We know that Eddie alerted in an apartment where a man who cut himself shaving paced the apartment for 45 minutes trying to stem the flow of blood.

I didn't know that

...  which apartment was it ?

Apartment 5a

Mr John Paul Gordon.

Beg your pardon, Paul Anthony Gordon:

While we were in Portugal there were no incidents worthy of record, beyond this man that I have described, however there was one occasion when I cut myself shaving in the bathroom of the apartment. I would say that the cut bled for about 45 minutes and that it took some time until the cut stopped bleeding, during which period I walked around the apartment with paper tissues trying to stop the blood.

ah, I see,  it was the McCann's apartment you were refering to

[icabodcrane]

...  and whatever Eddie, the cadaver dog alerted to in the McCann's wardrobe,  it wasn't Paul Gordon's blood  ...  if it had been,  Keela, the blood dog would have alerted too  (  she didn't )

[ferryman]

...  and whatever Eddie, the cadaver dog alerted to in the McCann's wardrobe,  it wasn't Paul Gordon's blood  ...  if it had been,  Keela, the blood dog would have alerted too  (  she didn't )

Most likely an alerting error, same as Keela's alert to the boot, but Eddie's absence of alert was an error (by one dog or the other); and Eddie's initial failure to alert to cuddle-cat when he could see, sniff and pick up cuddle-cat; yet subsequent 'alert' after the toy was put in the cupboard was (yet another) error ...

The deployment of the dogs in PdL was a shambles ...

Here is an error by Keela

The curtains (286A/2007 - CR/L 16 and 16B) and the piece of white curtain (286B/2007 - CR/L 1) and the fragments of bushes (286/2007 CR/L 21) were examined for the presence of blood. No blood was found.


John Lowe

The curtain was sent because Keela alerted ...

[debunker]

Hello to everyone.

In theory - I think any alert by Eddie alone could be suggestive of cadaver odour.

However, without evidence being found which can be forensically tested then .....

No-one can say whether the alert was to a recent or ancient deposit - so it cannot be 'dated'. 
 
No-one can say whether the alert was from odour emanating from above or below the ground - or even if it had drifted there from another source.

No-one can say whether it was an odour left by direct contact with a cadaver or an odour innocently transferred to that same place from elsewhere by any number of people or objects.

No-one can say whether the original source was decomposed pigmeat or human remains as the dogs cannot differentiate between the two.

No-one can say for sure that the dog had alerted in error or whether it was a genuine alert.

No-one can say for sure that the dog had alerted as a result of unconscious cueing - or not.

I have always presumed that it is because of these numerous variables that physical evidence capable of being forensically tested is absolutely essential  - in order for the 'alerts' to be regarded as evidence.   If nothing is found to corroberrate the alerts - then any of the above 'possibilities' could be the reason for an alert.



 

If we start off not knowing if object X has cadaver odor, a single alert by Eddie adds nothing to the information we have about whether there is cadaver odor present. If there is a lack of reaction from Keela, that then gives us more information than we had when we started.

A single alert from eddie says NOTHING about cadaver odor.

[ferryman]

Hello to everyone.

In theory - I think any alert by Eddie alone could be suggestive of cadaver odour.

However, without evidence being found which can be forensically tested then .....

No-one can say whether the alert was to a recent or ancient deposit - so it cannot be 'dated'. 
 
No-one can say whether the alert was from odour emanating from above or below the ground - or even if it had drifted there from another source.

No-one can say whether it was an odour left by direct contact with a cadaver or an odour innocently transferred to that same place from elsewhere by any number of people or objects.

No-one can say whether the original source was decomposed pigmeat or human remains as the dogs cannot differentiate between the two.

No-one can say for sure that the dog had alerted in error or whether it was a genuine alert.

No-one can say for sure that the dog had alerted as a result of unconscious cueing - or not.

I have always presumed that it is because of these numerous variables that physical evidence capable of being forensically tested is absolutely essential  - in order for the 'alerts' to be regarded as evidence.   If nothing is found to corroberrate the alerts - then any of the above 'possibilities' could be the reason for an alert.



 

If we start off not knowing if object X has cadaver odor, a single alert by Eddie adds nothing to the information we have about whether there is cadaver odor present. If there is a lack of reaction from Keela, that then gives us more information than we had when we started.

A single alert from eddie says NOTHING about cadaver odor.

Hitherto, the emphasis has tended to be on finding blood or finding a body.

That is because blood, unlike death scent, can be recovered and examined for information.

It is this US forensic canine program that seems to seek to turn that on its head.

[Benice]

I agree.  However, Eddie WAS  trained to alert to cadaver odour and therefore when he alerted and Keela did not, then IMO it had to be initially regarded as 'suggestive' of the possibility of cadaver odour being present in that area - and 'swabs' taken to provide corroberration or clarification of his alerts via forensic testing. 

If none could be obtained then because of the different possible scenarios which I mentioned above - Eddie's alerts cannot be considered as evidence of Madeleine's death or indeed that any cadaver had ever been in 5a. 





 

 



 



   

       

[Benice]

Oops sorry, I was replying to Ferryman - I didn't realise his/her post would not automatically be quoted in my reply.


 

[debunker]

I agree.  However, Eddie WAS  trained to alert to cadaver odour and therefore when he alerted and Keela did not, then IMO it had to be initially regarded as 'suggestive' of the possibility of cadaver odour being present in that area - and 'swabs' taken to provide corroberration or clarification of his alerts via forensic testing. 

If none could be obtained then because of the different possible scenarios which I mentioned above - Eddie's alerts cannot be considered as evidence of Madeleine's death or indeed that any cadaver had ever been in 5a. 

My question is- how many times did Eddie alert and Keela not alert to the same object/place.

[ censored word ]s frequently suggest that there were indications of cadaver odor everywhere. In fact there were vanishingly few such cases.

For instance, we know that the McCanns belongings investigated on the floor by the dogs were stored in boxes. We know that cross contamination occurs. There was no chain of custody of the items and no record available of which items had been proximate to other items. Consequently logically we can only accept one indication of cadaver odor from that whole shebang- it could easily be cross contamination.



 

 



 



   

     

[ferryman]

I agree.  However, Eddie WAS  trained to alert to cadaver odour and therefore when he alerted and Keela did not, then IMO it had to be initially regarded as 'suggestive' of the possibility of cadaver odour being present in that area - and 'swabs' taken to provide corroberration or clarification of his alerts via forensic testing. 

If none could be obtained then because of the different possible scenarios which I mentioned above - Eddie's alerts cannot be considered as evidence of Madeleine's death or indeed that any cadaver had ever been in 5a.







 

 



 



   

     

That's fair (welcome to the board, incidentally)

[sadie]

...  and whatever Eddie, the cadaver dog alerted to in the McCann's wardrobe,  it wasn't Paul Gordon's blood  ...  if it had been,  Keela, the blood dog would have alerted too  (  she didn't )

Was Keela shown the wardrobe? 

[Benice]

I agree.  However, Eddie WAS  trained to alert to cadaver odour and therefore when he alerted and Keela did not, then IMO it had to be initially regarded as 'suggestive' of the possibility of cadaver odour being present in that area - and 'swabs' taken to provide corroberration or clarification of his alerts via forensic testing. 

If none could be obtained then because of the different possible scenarios which I mentioned above - Eddie's alerts cannot be considered as evidence of Madeleine's death or indeed that any cadaver had ever been in 5a. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My question is- how many times did Eddie alert and Keela not alert to the same object/place.

[ censored word ]s frequently suggest that there were indications of cadaver odor everywhere. In fact there were vanishingly few such cases.

For instance, we know that the McCanns belongings investigated on the floor by the dogs were stored in boxes. We know that cross contamination occurs. There was no chain of custody of the items and no record available of which items had been proximate to other items. Consequently logically we can only accept one indication of cadaver odor from that whole shebang- it could easily be cross contamination.

 

     

I find the fact that all the clothing alerted to came from ONE box to be quite amazing.   What are the chances of every one of those items -  out of the scores of items involved - which required several boxes to contain them all, being coincidentally packed into the same box?

[Carana]

I agree.  However, Eddie WAS  trained to alert to cadaver odour and therefore when he alerted and Keela did not, then IMO it had to be initially regarded as 'suggestive' of the possibility of cadaver odour being present in that area - and 'swabs' taken to provide corroberration or clarification of his alerts via forensic testing. 

If none could be obtained then because of the different possible scenarios which I mentioned above - Eddie's alerts cannot be considered as evidence of Madeleine's death or indeed that any cadaver had ever been in 5a. 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My question is- how many times did Eddie alert and Keela not alert to the same object/place.

[ censored word ]s frequently suggest that there were indications of cadaver odor everywhere. In fact there were vanishingly few such cases.

For instance, we know that the McCanns belongings investigated on the floor by the dogs were stored in boxes. We know that cross contamination occurs. There was no chain of custody of the items and no record available of which items had been proximate to other items. Consequently logically we can only accept one indication of cadaver odor from that whole shebang- it could easily be cross contamination.

 

     

I find the fact that all the clothing alerted to came from ONE box to be quite amazing.   What are the chances of every one of those items -  out of the scores of items involved - which required several boxes to contain them all, being coincidentally packed into the same box?

Welcome.

Yes, odd, isn't it?

[Carana]

There are so many dog threads that I get lost.


Something that I find interesting.

Listen

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTF4JTLeOWA

From around 3:40 ish.

What do you hear him say about the intention of putting Eddie in the car?