Does Eddie alert to Pork/Pig/Pig Blood? Martin Grime's Statements.

[ferryman]

Context, Roger

You'd need to read the whole of his evidence in that court to draw any conclusions.

The context is that Grime's deployment of the dog in the gym was incompetent.

[Lyall]

There is no need for context.

Grime states quite clearly that one touch of a cadaver and a subsequent touch of a piece of paper would transfer the scent. What context could there be that would alter that statement.

State of decomposition?

[Rogerandout]

Well as i have stated given the advanced nature and ingenuity of modern terrorist bomb makers you are a braver man than me.

And really the only way to test ones opinion of the science behind these dogs is to put yourself in a position where you actually had to make your own choice about the reliability of them when your own safety was at stake. Hence the bomb analogy.

My own take is that these alerts represent indications. These indications have to be weighed up against the number of searches undertaken and the concentration of the alerts to see if a pattern develops.

Clearly there was a pattern, in that they only alerted to property and possessions belonging to the McCann's.

Whilst this may not be definitive evidence per se it is a starting point with which to investigate further. Although of course the PJ could not because the McCann's fled Portugal and hired certainly the UK's and probably the world's most expensive extradition lawyers before the PJ could complete their investigation into the family.

Which also speaks as loudly as the alerts themselves.

If dogs alerted to explosives in a particular place and that place was carefully searched, there would be no problem with boarding the plane. Dogs alert in error- explosive dogs alert to caps for cap guns!

As to the alerts, they are only circumstantial evidence. The police over valued them initially and were unable to gather any direct evidence to charge the McCanns. The McCanns returned to England and were not sent rogatory requests which could have happened and the PJ chose not to do that. They had no requirement as arguidos to answer questions anyway, so there was nothing the PJ could have gained by having them local; they could have been recalled to Portugal, but they were not. The return to England is over valued by the [ censored word].

[Redblossom]

Well as i have stated given the advanced nature and ingenuity of modern terrorist bomb makers you are a braver man than me.

And really the only way to test ones opinion of the science behind these dogs is to put yourself in a position where you actually had to make your own choice about the reliability of them when your own safety was at stake. Hence the bomb analogy.

My own take is that these alerts represent indications. These indications have to be weighed up against the number of searches undertaken and the concentration of the alerts to see if a pattern develops.

Clearly there was a pattern, in that they only alerted to property and possessions belonging to the McCann's.

Whilst this may not be definitive evidence per se it is a starting point with which to investigate further. Although of course the PJ could not because the McCann's fled Portugal and hired certainly the UK's and probably the world's most expensive extradition lawyers before the PJ could complete their investigation into the family.

Which also speaks as loudly as the alerts themselves.

The best lawyers but the crappiest detectives.....Now why does that just not make any sense

[pathfinder73]

Eddie's evidence can only ever me circumstantial, and so may have contributed to a case which convicted a person, but could never of itself gain that conviction.

There is no case in which he has found the only evidence- I think you are making that up out of emotion rather than reason, although of course I am happy to accept it so long as you provide a cite for it.

Check out Adrian/Kate Prout and Attracta Harron cases.

[Lyall]

It was actually the reaction to the dogs findings that finally made me realise there was or is something off about them.

The dogs, you mean?

I think the dogs were sound enough.

The problem was the handler.

Do you think American police can't use google, ferryman?

Do you think they haven't seen the PdL videos?

Do you think they don't know everything about the McCann case? And Jersey too.

They recognise Mr Grime as a professional. Why don't you?

[Albertini]

The context is that Grime's deployment of the dog in the gym was incompetent.

I know i keep asking but i never seem to see any kind of reply, so let me try again.

Can you provide details of the training, accreditation qualifications and fieldwork you have undertaken and achieved in the field of EVRD canines.

Once again may i remind you that a Google search does not count.

Look forward to a reply.

[ferryman]

Do you think American police can't use google, ferryman?

Do you think they haven't seen the PdL videos?

Do you think they don't know everything about the McCann case? And Jersey too.

They recognise Mr Grime as a professional. Why don't you?

The forensic canine program?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm!

[pegasus]

Ok you ignore the incorrect signal by the airport dog and get on the totally safe plane and its in-flight meal time and an EVRD who happens to be sitting next to you barks at the pork curry, but not at the veggie burger, does this affect your culinary choice? 

[Albertini]

If dogs alerted to explosives in a particular place and that place was carefully searched, there would be no problem with boarding the plane. Dogs alert in error- explosive dogs alert to caps for cap guns!

As to the alerts, they are only circumstantial evidence. The police over valued them initially and were unable to gather any direct evidence to charge the McCanns. The McCanns returned to England and were not sent rogatory requests which could have happened and the PJ chose not to do that. They had no requirement as arguidos to answer questions anyway, so there was nothing the PJ could have gained by having them local; they could have been recalled to Portugal, but they were not. The return to England is over valued by the [ censored word].

You are probably right they did over value them to begin with, however there was a clear pattern of alerts, wasn't there?

The McCann's were clearly in a state of panic about being held and spoke of fleeing the country to Spain if i recall. Why on earth would they think they need to do that in a European country?

The return to England was not overvalued when they hired Pinochet's extradition lawyers Angus McBride & Michael Caplan.

Why on earth would innocent parents of a missing child feel the need to do that, and what inference can be drawn from parents openly thinking of fleeing the country and hiring such a crack and expensive team?

[Rogerandout]

Check out Adrian/Kate Prout and Attracta Harron cases.

Well, in the Kate Prout Case the Mirror sums up the evidence as:
Mr Pixton explained how the prosecution service built its case from Mrs Prout's disappearance on November 5 2007 to Prout's trial, which started on January 12 this year.
He said: "We had a case where no body was ever found and therefore no creating of a forensic link between Adrian Prout and his wife's disappearance.
"What we did have was evidence to show that this crime was premeditated, Adrian Prout had a means of concealing her body and also a reason to do so.
"The South West Complex Case Work Unit took on this case at an early stage when it became apparent it would be a complex and lengthy investigation. The unit deals with serious and organised crime throughout the south west.
"We worked closely with the Gloucestershire Constabulary, and a number of expert witnesses, to make sure we would be able to present every available piece of evidence to this jury at court.
"The code of the crown prosecutors dictates we must have sufficient evidence for a good prospect of conviction before we charge a suspect.
"The evidence that the court heard included evidence of motive, evidence of means and also the evidence of the extra-marital affair that he was engaged in."
He added: "Clearly we felt there was sufficient evidence in this case, but the final decision rests with the jury."

NO MENTION OF DOGGY EVIDENCE

In the Attracta Harron Case the Dogs actually found a body. It is what they are meant to do. Their finding the body was not part of the evidence given

NO DOGGY EVIDENCE

[pathfinder73]

probably because they are far more intelligent than you are

When this comes to court you'll find how intelligent those dogs were and without them this case would never be solved.

[Rogerandout]

You are probably right they did over value them to begin with, however there was a clear pattern of alerts, wasn't there?

The McCann's were clearly in a state of panic about being held and spoke of fleeing the country to Spain if i recall. Why on earth would they think they need to do that in a European country?

The return to England was not overvalued when they hired Pinochet's extradition lawyers Angus McBride & Michael Caplan.

Why on earth would innocent parents of a missing child feel the need to do that, and what inference can be drawn from parents openly thinking of fleeing the country and hiring such a crack and expensive team?

As a middle class professional of means, I would have done exactly the same if I thought the police intended to arrest and imprison me on flimsy evidence. Maybe you would not and would have been a noble martyr.

[Rogerandout]

Ok you ignore the incorrect signal by the airport dog and get on the totally safe plane and its in-flight meal time and an EVRD who happens to be sitting next to you barks at the pork curry, but not at the veggie burger, does this affect your culinary choice?

I am told that I cannot use a certain word but you are becoming increasingly laughable in your pursuit of some sort of confession.

[pathfinder73]

Well, in the Kate Prout Case the Mirror sums up the evidence as:
Mr Pixton explained how the prosecution service built its case from Mrs Prout's disappearance on November 5 2007 to Prout's trial, which started on January 12 this year.
He said: "We had a case where no body was ever found and therefore no creating of a forensic link between Adrian Prout and his wife's disappearance.
"What we did have was evidence to show that this crime was premeditated, Adrian Prout had a means of concealing her body and also a reason to do so.
"The South West Complex Case Work Unit took on this case at an early stage when it became apparent it would be a complex and lengthy investigation. The unit deals with serious and organised crime throughout the south west.
"We worked closely with the Gloucestershire Constabulary, and a number of expert witnesses, to make sure we would be able to present every available piece of evidence to this jury at court.
"The code of the crown prosecutors dictates we must have sufficient evidence for a good prospect of conviction before we charge a suspect.
"The evidence that the court heard included evidence of motive, evidence of means and also the evidence of the extra-marital affair that he was engaged in."
He added: "Clearly we felt there was sufficient evidence in this case, but the final decision rests with the jury."

NO MENTION OF DOGGY EVIDENCE

In the Attracta Harron Case the Dogs actually found a body. It is what they are meant to do. Their finding the body was not part of the evidence given

NO DOGGY EVIDENCE

Eddie found the only evidence in both cases. Cadaver odour in the burnt out car (no forensic evidence found in car) and Prout's home. Eddie also found Harron's buried body. He found it!