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

[Redblossom]

Doesn't have to be dead pigs.   Cadaverscent emanates from body 'bits' & bodily fluid from living people as well as from dead bodies.   Eddie could detect the minutest traces from underground.     All according to Martin Grime not me.

All according to mr grime

You owe me a reply regarding according to mr grime lol
My post

341
 



Here
Which you mised or ignored

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2943.msg111062#msg111062

look foward to your links for your asertions  or apologies lol, nite now dear......
 

[Benice]

There seems to be a major difference of opinion between well qualified people about whether or not it was bone. Best answer is that it has neither been confirmed nor disproven- could be either, but is not convincing evidence.

IIRC correctly the only person who first thought it may have been bone - later changed her mind because of the speed of deterioration which she noticed was taking place  - which could not have happened if it was bone.

(From memory - so I could be wrong.  If I get time I will try to find the article)

[Redblossom]

IIRC correctly the only person who first thought it may have been bone - later changed her mind because of the speed of deterioration which she noticed was taking place  - which could not have happened if it was bone.

(From memory - so I could be wrong.  If I get time I will try to find the article)

Totally wrong...the anthropologist found the piece and said it was a fragment of a childs skull......nothing at all to do with speed of deterioration.......the fragment was sent away and when it came back was different in size weight appearance  and texture,  was not the same piece....duh?


do watch from 6 05

[Benice]

Yes dear..nite dearYou have a habit of putting words into mr grimes mouth like he said if both dogs alert it means its blood..... Not funny and notintelligent just as you did earlier today search your own posts and read back......on your own rubbish tara now

Grime always sent Eddie in first.  If Eddie didn't alert, he didn't bother to send Keela in because he knew that if blood had been insitu then Eddie would have detected it.

If Eddie does alert then he sends Keela in.   If she alerts at the same place - he presumes a blood detection because Keela only alerts to blood.      If she doesn't alert at the same place - he then assumes cadaverscent - because Keela does not alert to cadaverscent.

Both dogs alerted to the key fob in the car.   Forensics found that the DNA matched Gerry - who is not a cadaver.

If you don't want to believe that - and prefer instead to reply with nasty sarcastic comments - that's not my problem.

[Lyall]

Grime always sent Eddie in first.  If Eddie didn't alert, he didn't bother to send Keela in because he knew that if blood had been insitu then Eddie would have detected it.

If Eddie does alert then he sends Keela in.   If she alerts at the same place - he presumes a blood detection because Keela only alerts to blood.      If she doesn't alert at the same place - he then assumes cadaverscent - because Keela does not alert to cadaverscent.

Both dogs alerted to the key fob in the car.   Forensics found that the DNA matched Gerry - who is not a cadaver.

If you don't want to believe that - and prefer instead to reply with nasty sarcastic comments - that's not my problem.

The logic you're claiming on behalf of Mr Grime is false, and the term 'alert at the same place' is also meaningless when you're dealing with microscopic spots: if two spots of different material are next to each other the cadaver dog could have detected both.

[Benice]

The logic you're claiming on behalf of Mr Grime is false, and the term 'alert at the same place' is also meaningless when you're dealing with microscopic spots: if two spots of different material are next to each other the cadaver dog could have detected both.

So why do you think M. Grime sent Eddie in first - and if he didn't alert - why did he not think it necessary to send Keela in afterwards?

IMO the problem with this whole subject is that it is not the exact science some people think it is and some people don't appear to understand that both dogs alerted to blood - and both dogs also alerted to blood from living people

If both dogs alert at the same spot - and there is no physical residue that can be collected then there is no way of proving what Eddie alerted to.    M.Grime's only way of narrowing it down was if Eddie alerted in a place where Keela did not.   If that happened he could rule out blood - but without corroborating evidence he still could not identify the precise reason why Eddie had alerted because there were different scenarios which would produce an alert - some of which did not involve the actual presence of a cadaver at that spot.

[Lyall]

So why do you think M. Grime sent Eddie in first - and if he didn't alert - why did he not think it necessary to send Keela in afterwards?

IMO the problem with this whole subject is that it is not the exact science some people think it is and some people don't appear to understand that both dogs alerted to blood - and both dogs also alerted to blood from living people

If both dogs alert at the same spot - and there is no physical residue that can be collected then there is no way of proving what Eddie alerted to.    M.Grime's only way of narrowing it down was if Eddie alerted in a place where Keela did not.   If that happened he could rule out blood - but without corroborating evidence he still could not identify the precise reason why Eddie had alerted because there were different scenarios which would produce an alert - some of which did not involve the actual presence of a cadaver at that spot.

I don't think it's the norm for two different types of dog to be used to 'narrow it down' - Mr Grime using both types shows just how professional he is imo. In the Anthony case in Florida only one type was used, there was no dna corroboration of the alerts but evidence of them was still heard in the courtroom.

That wouldn't currently happen in a Portuguese or English courtroom of course - I don't know why you don't just leave it at that. Just say "that evidence is not used in Portuguese trials" and "the evidence is controversial". Both of those statements are true.

But the pseudoscience being used here and elsewhere to discredit the dogs, science and Mr Grime isn't true.

[colombosstogey]

Also,  as some have pointed out on the previous thread,   Eddie might well have been trained using human bodies,  but as they cannot tell human body decomposition from pork decomposition it is neither here nor there.

They use pigs hearts for transplant into humans.

Oh for goodness sake. A dog only trained on human cadaver knows the difference between that and a psuedo scent.

Get real. What is the point of all this anyway.

Which ever way the dog is trained it is done solely to find a traces of human dead bodies, and it does very successfully I believe 100 percent.

This thread is put here purely for the pros to make a stupid point about using pork. SO WHAT.

IF THEY DO USE a pseudo scent to train their dogs, it isnt a lump of pork from the butchers. They use specialised cells from a pig, which has gone through a special process, most of which the DNA has been extracted.

They use similar cells to make human skin now especially for burn victims. The cells are from a pig but there is no DNA of the pig. (Do google it), they also use it now to make implants for breast cancer patients but it doesnt mean the patient will suddenly develop a strong desire to wallow in the mud lol.

Its a psuedo scent not a lump of pork.  8-)(--)

[colombosstogey]

Its ok Pegasus, I found reference to it though not the original source

From 24 secs

Sooo.....the dogs were alerting.....ground was dug......dumped meat found, dogs did not take interest... continued to alert...human remains found

The thing is if the dogs are trained using human scent they will NEVER alert to pseudo scent aka meat or other products. This is how they are trained.

The video shows this very well, but sadly the pro mccanns will find a way to dis this lol..... 8-)(--)

[Rogerandout]

Yes dear..nite dearYou have a habit of putting words into mr grimes mouth like he said if both dogs alert it means its blood..... Not funny and notintelligent just as you did earlier today search your own posts and read back......on your own rubbish tara now

I am amazed that you still don't understand how the dogs work and why both are needed to suggest cadaver odour rather than blood. Eddie was a blood dog and trained as such. He will always alert to blood. Additionally he will alert to human (and porcine) decay. If Eddie alerts it is suggestive of blood or cadaver, if Keela fails to alert in the same place it is suggestive of cadaver. Simples.

[Rogerandout]

There's a reward available for whichever one of you guys is the next to mention toenails

Toenails, teeth and hair do not decay like flesh so are not detectable by a cadaver dog. However if there is attached flesh to pulled teeth, pulled nails or pulled hair, then it will give off cadaver odor.

[Rogerandout]

and bo or bad breath!

We do not know if Eddie reacts to bad breath, but we do know that Bad Breath contains Putrescine and Cadaverine- major components of Cadaver Odor.

[Rogerandout]

The logic you're claiming on behalf of Mr Grime is false, and the term 'alert at the same place' is also meaningless when you're dealing with microscopic spots: if two spots of different material are next to each other the cadaver dog could have detected both.

It is no wonder that you make such errors when you do not understand what is going on.

Eddie reacts to dried blood- do you accept that? The dried blood can come from someone who is currently alive or currently dead.

If Eddie alerts, he could be alerting to blood. Do you accept that?

[Rogerandout]

I don't think it's the norm for two different types of dog to be used to 'narrow it down' - Mr Grime using both types shows just how professional he is imo. In the Anthony case in Florida only one type was used, there was no dna corroboration of the alerts but evidence of them was still heard in the courtroom.

That wouldn't currently happen in a Portuguese or English courtroom of course - I don't know why you don't just leave it at that. Just say "that evidence is not used in Portuguese trials" and "the evidence is controversial". Both of those statements are true.

But the pseudoscience being used here and elsewhere to discredit the dogs, science and Mr Grime isn't true.

Mr Grime states clearly that Eddie alerts to dried blood:

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm

"The dog EVRD (Eddie the Cadaver dog) is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. He is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'. They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being."

[Rogerandout]

IF THEY DO USE a pseudo scent to train their dogs, it isnt a lump of pork from the butchers. They use specialised cells from a pig, which has gone through a special process, most of which the DNA has been extracted.

I have not heard of this. Would you kindly produce a cite for this information.? Or is it just something that you think i the case?