The dreaded cadaver scent

[registrar]

Portugal's progressives try to rid herself of her Salazarian heritage

(only a few years ago the dictator was voted the greatest Portuguese ever in a TV poll)

Madeleine's disappearance got in the way of that

It's deeper, much deeper than just a case of disappearance

And to put Amaral - a manifest symbol of the politics of Salazar - in the driving seat of this investigation

Was asking for trouble from the off

[ferryman]

How manifest was the Amaral symbol before the Madeleine investigation?

[debunker]

Ahhh diddums

as was well exposed both in Luz and Jersey

the penny has finally dropped

Is that aimed at me.

I have never said anything else.

I have always said that the dogs have a probability of being correct between 60 and 90 % of the time for single marks, 40-80% for double marking my Eddie and Keela.

[debunker]

These dogs, as Mr. Grime himself points out, are used to give forensic scientists & police an indication as to where possible forensic evidence may be found. They are investigative tools, not more nor less, they themselves do not provide evidence. The worst damage done to the reputation of the dogs, IMO, has been done by those who claim a) the dogs are infallible & b) that their indications ARE evidence. It simply isn't true.

There alerts ARE evidence, circumstantial and untrustworthy, but evidence all the same.

[sadie]

Who do you think orchestrated it Registrar?

Amaral, or Grimes ... or who?


I agree it is powerful propaganda, very powerful, and it is only by careful analysis by such as Hb, debunker  and others on here, that its fallibility has been exposed.

Helped along, as you say, by the Jersey disaster.

Dunno - but speculation leads me down the path that the PJ generally were so frustrated with the lack of progress in the case and the worldwide 24/7 attention on them

That extreme measures were being deployed.

Portugal took the presidency of the EU that year (1st of July 2007) a LOT was at stake.

A video purporting that salmon eating dogs from the UK had implicated G and/or K to have had a part in murdering their first born, Madeleine. Might have appeared to be an attractive option.

My take - the PJ panicked - and needed a quick result.

FSS recorded no conclusive results

G&K did not play ball

Later Grime was humiliated with the same dogs in Jersey.

The house of cards fell apart.

Makes sense.

[sadie]

Portugal's progressives try to rid herself of her Salazarian heritage

(only a few years ago the dictator was voted the greatest Portuguese ever in a TV poll)

Madeleine's disappearance got in the way of that

It's deeper, much deeper than just a case of disappearance

And to put Amaral - a manifest symbol of the politics of Salazar - in the driving seat of this investigation

Was asking for trouble from the off

I find your take interesting.  It is somewhat in line with my thoughts

[Mrs. B]

I'm not entering in a discussion whatever anyone considers to be evidence or not. I am pointing out what Grime himself has stated in the official files.

Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.


He's the supposed expert on his own dogs, one assumes, so I'd go with what the man himself says.

[sadie]

These dogs, as Mr. Grime himself points out, are used to give forensic scientists & police an indication as to where possible forensic evidence may be found. They are investigative tools, not more nor less, they themselves do not provide evidence. The worst damage done to the reputation of the dogs, IMO, has been done by those who claim a) the dogs are infallible & b) that their indications ARE evidence. It simply isn't true.

There alerts ARE evidence, circumstantial and untrustworthy, but evidence all the same.

I agree, but I would qualify with the additional word "possibly"

.... but possibly evidence all the same.

[debunker]

I'm not entering in a discussion whatever anyone considers to be evidence or not. I am pointing out what Grime himself has stated in the official files.

Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.


He's the supposed expert on his own dogs, one assumes, so I'd go with what the man himself says.

That refers to "evidence of DNA, etc". A dog alert alone may also be evidence (not very convincing but evidence all the same.)

[debunker]

These dogs, as Mr. Grime himself points out, are used to give forensic scientists & police an indication as to where possible forensic evidence may be found. They are investigative tools, not more nor less, they themselves do not provide evidence. The worst damage done to the reputation of the dogs, IMO, has been done by those who claim a) the dogs are infallible & b) that their indications ARE evidence. It simply isn't true.

There alerts ARE evidence, circumstantial and untrustworthy, but evidence all the same.

I agree, but I would qualify with the additional word "possibly"

.... but possibly evidence all the same.

What would amke the evidence Possible or Not Possible?

[Mrs. B]

I'm not entering in a discussion whatever anyone considers to be evidence or not. I am pointing out what Grime himself has stated in the official files.

Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.


He's the supposed expert on his own dogs, one assumes, so I'd go with what the man himself says.

That refers to "evidence of DNA, etc". A dog alert alone may also be evidence (not very convincing but evidence all the same.)

I know that's your opinion, I just don't share it.

[sadie]

These dogs, as Mr. Grime himself points out, are used to give forensic scientists & police an indication as to where possible forensic evidence may be found. They are investigative tools, not more nor less, they themselves do not provide evidence. The worst damage done to the reputation of the dogs, IMO, has been done by those who claim a) the dogs are infallible & b) that their indications ARE evidence. It simply isn't true.

There alerts ARE evidence, circumstantial and untrustworthy, but evidence all the same.

I agree, but I would qualify with the additional word "possibly"

.... but possibly evidence all the same.

What would amke the evidence Possible or Not Possible?

Oh, I thought that you said it only stood a 40% to 80% chance of being correct ?

[registrar]

40%- 80%?

might as well toss a coin after invoking 'Did the parents do the deed?'

should give you a mathematically correct result

about half the time

(and a darn side cheaper than the 90k farce in Jersey cost)

Dross

[sadie]

That's why I would qualify it as only possible evidence.  Certainly not absolute evidence. 

Not by a long chalk. 

Therefore unsafe.

[debunker]

I'm not entering in a discussion whatever anyone considers to be evidence or not. I am pointing out what Grime himself has stated in the official files.

Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.


He's the supposed expert on his own dogs, one assumes, so I'd go with what the man himself says.

That refers to "evidence of DNA, etc". A dog alert alone may also be evidence (not very convincing but evidence all the same.)

I know that's your opinion, I just don't share it.

Not opinion. Fact. Evidence is any fact that can be brought to bear on a matter. Dog alerts have been admitted in UK and US courts.