Why didnt the portuguese police arrest the mccanns ... after the dogs findings

[Luz]

Is protecting children a "fascist" position?!!! Brilliant ...

[Carana]

What did the dogs actually find of any corroborated significance?

[ferryman]

Ten vehicles were screened in an underground multi storey car park at
Portimao. The vehicles, of which I did not know the owner details, were
parked on an empty floor with 20-30 feet between each. The vehicle
placement video recording and management of the process was conducted
by the PJ. The EVRD was then tasked to search the area. When passing a
vehicle I now know to be hired and in the possession of the McCann family,
the dog's behaviour changed substantially.

Martin Grime

Hmmmmmmmmmm!

[Carana]

I don't think that bringing the dogs over was a waste of time - they might have found something highly significant to take the case forward (whoever was responsible). Eddie might even have found a trace within the outdoor perimeters of the search area. However, there was nothing of significance discovered in this case.

[Rogerandout]

Well that b....rs one line of resistance.

[ferryman]

I don't think that bringing the dogs over was a waste of time - they might have found something highly significant to take the case forward (whoever was responsible). Eddie might even have found a trace within the outdoor perimeters of the search area. However, there was nothing of significance discovered in this case.

I would agree with that.

There was a place in the investigation for a properly deployed cadaver dog, I think.

[pegasus]

In the Prout case, did police say "oh we'll ignore the dog indication in that vehicle because the handler knew who the vehicle belongs to and was subconciously cuing the dog" ?
In the Hazell case, did police say "oh lets not bother looking up there yet again, that dog pointing up there is just being subconciously cued by the handler because the handler knows whose house they are in" ?

[Rogerandout]

In the Prout case, did police say "oh we'll ignore the dog indication in that vehicle because the handler knew who the vehicle belongs to and was subconciously cuing the dog" ?
In the Hazell case, did police say "oh lets not bother looking up there yet again, that dog pointing up there is just being subconciously cued by the handler because the handler knows whose house they are in" ?

I am not saying that no notice should be given, only that it should not be accepted as real evidence.

[ferryman]

In the Prout case, did police say "oh we'll ignore the dog indication in that vehicle because the handler knew who the vehicle belongs to and was subconciously cuing the dog" ?
In the Hazell case, did police say "oh lets not bother looking up there yet again, that dog pointing up there is just being subconciously cued by the handler because the handler knows whose house they are in" ?

In the Prout court, the dog indication was never used.

English courts exclude uncorroborated dog alerts.

Scottish courts allow them.

[pegasus]

I am not saying that no notice should be given, only that it should not be accepted as real evidence.

Agreed dogs give indications, not evidence.
In the Hazell case the apparent evidence (at least one professional search revealing nothing) turned out to be incorrect, and the dog indication (even with handler knowing whose house it is and subconciously cuing) turned out to be correct.

[Redblossom]

The reason is perfectly simple.  There simply was insufficient evidence to secure a conviction in a Court of Law and at the end of the day that's what matters.   As it is I don't buy this do(d)ggy evidence ; there's too much of the  dog that didn't bark in the night about this one.

Hello and welcome, interesting take...so nothing matters in your opinion except whether someone is charged and/or or convicted....I disagree...unless your comment was directly related to why they werent charged after the dog alerts.......in that case apologies in advance.......and there is nothing dodgy about the dogs.....just another case they worked on doing what they are trained and tasked to do...the  original question is pointless anyway..... No one is ever convicted on dog evidence or whatever you want to call it alone..without a body or clear forensic or other evidence, what the dogs provide is circumstantial evidence just like any other circumstantial evidence



You could ask yourself in how many cases of missing people have cadaver dogs alerted and they were found  dead or never found and in how many cases did they alert and the people turned out alive......
 >@@(*&)

[Cariad]

Hello and welcome, interesting take...so nothing matters in your opinion except whether someone is charged and/or or convicted....I disagree...unless your comment was directly related to why they werent charged after the dog alerts.......in that case apologies in advance.......and there is nothing dodgy about the dogs.....just another case they worked on doing what they are trained and tasked to do...the  original question is pointless anyway..... No one is ever convicted on dog evidence or whatever you want to call it alone..without a body or clear forensic or other evidence, what the dogs provide is circumstantial evidence just like any other circumstantial evidence



You could ask yourself in how many cases of missing people have cadaver dogs alerted and they were found  dead or never found and in how many cases did they alert and the people turned out alive......
 >@@(*&)

Excellent question. There must be data about this of the net. I shall have a dig around today and see what I can find....

[Rogerandout]

Excellent question. There must be data about this of the net. I shall have a dig around today and see what I can find....

The problem is how statistics and news stories are compiled. News stories require interest, so 'Cadaver Dog finds f all' is not a news story. 'Cadaver dog confirmed by evidence' is a news story. Grimes uses this in his statistics- he would count Jersey and PdL as possibles rather than negatives. This way, negatives never balance out the times when confirmation is found.

[Cariad]

The problem is how statistics and news stories are compiled. News stories require interest, so 'Cadaver Dog finds f all' is not a news story. 'Cadaver dog confirmed by evidence' is a news story. Grimes uses this in his statistics- he would count Jersey and PdL as possibles rather than negatives. This way, negatives never balance out the times when confirmation is found.

I haven't even started looking as I have a virus and feel sorry for myself. There may be papers published on the subject though. I assume that there is a lot of interest in false positives among professionals.

[Carana]

The problem is how statistics and news stories are compiled. News stories require interest, so 'Cadaver Dog finds f all' is not a news story. 'Cadaver dog confirmed by evidence' is a news story. Grimes uses this in his statistics- he would count Jersey and PdL as possibles rather than negatives. This way, negatives never balance out the times when confirmation is found.

I was about to say very much the same. I could point out a high profile case in which a dog alert proved to be wrong as the person in question was later found alive, but someone else could point out that a dog alert eventually turned out to be correct.

Police statistics might be more useful if available, but in which country? With which dogs?