The Cracked Mirror.

[Benice]

Correct, but if you read that training report you can see a gives a specific alert to cadaver scent.

Eddie only had one alert no matter what he was alerting to - he barked. 

[Albertini]

Eddie only had one alert no matter what he was alerting to - he barked.

Genuine question, can you advise where you saw that?

[Benice]

Genuine question, can you advise where you saw that?

It's from Martin Grimes statements - he explained that Keela alerted by Freezing and Eddie by barking.  In Eddie's case he either alerted (barked) or he didn't - full stop.   May I ask what you think Eddie did that was different when alerting to cadaverscent  - to what he did when alerting to blood from a living person?

[AnneGuedes]

Blood is the only other body product that, when decaying (of course independently of the fact the blood producer died or not, from bleeding or not), would make Eddie bark. It's been repeated here that where Keela, who stricto senso reacts only to blood, didn't react, Eddie smelt death. But
1) the scent of death, being the same for all humans, is anonymous. This is why no court might deduce from Eddie's alert that a particular individual produced the scent.
2) there's always a possibility of error. The probability of repeated error is extremely remote.

[Benice]

Blood is the only other body product that, when decaying (of course independently of the fact the blood producer died or not, from bleeding or not), would make Eddie bark. It's been repeated here that where Keela, who stricto senso reacts only to blood, didn't react, Eddie smelt death. But
1) the scent of death, being the same for all humans, is anonymous. This is why no court might deduce from Eddie's alert that a particular individual produced the scent.
2) there's always a possibility of error. The probability of repeated error is extremely remote.

Eddie alerted to semen - which according to Grime was within his remit.

[Carana]

Correct, but if you read that training report you can see a gives a specific alert to cadaver scent.

I'm not sure what you mean. Did he give a different type of alert if he'd detected anything else within his training parameters?

I haven't found anything in that vein.

[Rachel Granada]

So on or after the time all the other members of the group had refused to take part?

Yes, perhaps so.  I certainly don't blame the others for not taking part - by then it had become clear that the PJ were trying to stitch up Kate and Gerry McCann.  This had become clear when the ridiculous allegation that Madeleine's remains had been in the boot of the car was put to them.

Were you aware that the group were all willing in those first days to do a recon, but the PJ put the kybosh on it? Some nonsense about having to close the airspace, I understand.

[Rachel Granada]

Correct, but if you read that training report you can see a gives a specific alert to cadaver scent.

That's not correct, Albertini.  As Benice says, Eddie just barks.  And that bark does not automatically mean cadaver scent.

This "Eddie barked, it MUST be cadaver scent" misunderstanding has, I believe, swayed many people in this case who don't know that it is not the case.

This lack of knowledge has cost Tony Bennett thousands and thousands of pounds.

[Benice]

Well read the words form the Judges summation. Their ruling and judgement is clear as day that Amaral's thesis, in law, was a valid interpretation of the facts gathered.

I have no idea why they are taking him to court again, you need to ask them. All i know is what was said the last time the issue of his claims, via his book, were brought to a Court.

In relation to delaying it, there is no point in arguing who has delayed it, McCann supporters say he did, those not of the abduction belief say the Mccann's delayed it.

This is an extract from the text you provided
Quote
Suggestive data ("indications") that were deemed to be insufficient in terms of evidence in a criminal investigation, can be appreciated in a different way, in an interpretation that can legitimately be published as a book, as long as the interpretation does not offend any fundamental rights of anyone involved. In our view that said interpretation does not offend the applicants' rights." End quote

The reason they could claim the book did not offend the applicant's rights was because libel had not been proved in a court of law.    That is why the McCanns are taking Amaral to court - to establish that fact - and judging by the some of the downright lies in his book they won't have much trouble doing it.

[Matthew Wyse]

Its that very simple guys.  If the Mccanns really wanted to have a reconstruction they could have one at any time allowing for the appropriate arrangement time certainly.  In fact it is my belief that they don't want a reconstruction as they are teensey weensey bit scared of the consequences given the way in which they have been so vocal towards the Porto cops.

[ferryman]

Genuine question, can you advise where you saw that?

'Based upon the dogs' behaviour, is it possible to distinguish between a strong signal and a weak signal'.


The dogs' passive CSI alert provides an indication as per their training and does not vary. They only give an alert when they are 'positive' that the target of the odour is present and immediately accessible. If they had any doubts they would not give an alert. EVRD gives an alert by means of a vocal bark.

From Martin Grime's rogatory interview.

[Rachel Granada]

This is an extract from the text you provided
Quote
Suggestive data ("indications") that were deemed to be insufficient in terms of evidence in a criminal investigation, can be appreciated in a different way, in an interpretation that can legitimately be published as a book, as long as the interpretation does not offend any fundamental rights of anyone involved. In our view that said interpretation does not offend the applicants' rights." End quote

The reason they could claim the book did not offend the applicant's rights was because libel had not been proved in a court of law.    That is why the McCanns are taking Amaral to court - to establish that fact - and judging by the some of the downright lies in his book they won't have much trouble doing it.

Yes. this is correct, Benice.  The other cases were just about the temporary injunction I understand, and the forthcoming court case is the one where the book may or may not be deemed libellous.

[Albertini]

'Based upon the dogs' behaviour, is it possible to distinguish between a strong signal and a weak signal'.


The dogs' passive CSI alert provides an indication as per their training and does not vary. They only give an alert when they are 'positive' that the target of the odour is present and immediately accessible. If they had any doubts they would not give an alert. EVRD gives an alert by means of a vocal bark.

From Martin Grime's rogatory interview.

But the blood alert is classed as a CSI alert, and the EVRD alert is for cadaver scent, isn't it, irrespecitve of which dog alerts to it?

I take it that Eddie barks to cadaver but freezes to blood, as Keela does to blood?

This is the problem with us non experts trying to interpret reports, none of us are qualified to give an accurate answer as to what does what.

Would you say then irrespective of the alert signal that the areas where the EVRD (cadaver) alerts but the CSI (Blood) doesn't indicates cadaver scent irrespective of the alert given?

After all if it was blood in that location then both dogs would alert.

Do you agree with that?

[ferryman]

But the blood alert is classed as a CSI alert, and the EVRD alert is for cadaver scent, isn't it, irrespecitve of which dog alerts to it?

Nope!

In the Attracta Harron case Eddie alerted to blood, from which the victim's dna was extracted.

[Carana]

Its that very simple guys.  If the Mccanns really wanted to have a reconstruction they could have one at any time allowing for the appropriate arrangement time certainly.  In fact it is my belief that they don't want a reconstruction as they are teensey weensey bit scared of the consequences given the way in which they have been so vocal towards the Porto cops.

What do you mean by "they don't want"? Do you mean now, in 2013, or back in 2008?

Amaral could have organised it in the days following the disappearance in May 2007... but didn't.

Even if the purpose of conducting a reconstruction back in May 2007 (in the PT system) was to check out the T9 as opposed to appealing for information, it could have been explained to the press.

By 2008, with all the lurid headlines, I'm not really surprised that they were wondering what this was all about.


Aside from the initial panic interviews given by family members back in the UK, when have the T9 been "vocal" concerning the PT cops?