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

[Rogerandout]

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.

How do you explain the quote from Mr Grime above where he says that Eddie alerted to a piece of pork soaked in petrol for a week and then burnt?

[Redblossom]

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.

You have got it wrong yet again. Eddie (the cadaver dog) is sent in to find the remnant scent of a body, not blood. Keela is only sent in after he alerts to find back up forensic evidence, ie blood, so dna can be matched, she is not sent in to confirm that Eddie has alerted to blood! That would fly in the face of the possibility of someone who bled and then died

Again, where is your back up for the emboldened statement of yours about what Grime presumes? You said previously this is according to Grime. Awaiting quote. Thanks. On second thoughts dont bother, if it existed you would have produced it by now after being asked twice. All it is is your personal mistaken take.

And, proof that Mr Grime presumes no such thing if both dogs alert in the same place is his words in his report about the car search.....in his opinion:

It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to 'cadaver scent'
contaminant or human blood scent.

Also take note that in the 5a flat search where both dogs alerted he did not say there was a possibility Eddie was alerting to blood, he said in his opinion the alerts were suggestive of cadaver scent....


Have to go out now

Edited

[pegasus]

There are three locations of the apartment indicated (lounge, flowerbed, a bedroom).
Given the suggestions raised in this thread and elsewhere, that any given single indication may possibly have explanation outside the case, what if two of those locations are irrelevant, and only one is relevant?
For example what if the lounge is irrelevant (maybe tiler injury during construction of building) and the flowerbed is irrelevant (maybe gardener cuts hand on climbing plant)?

[Benice]

You have got it wrong yet again. Eddie (the cadaver dog) is sent in to find the remnant scent of a body, not blood. Keela is only sent in after he alerts to find back up forensic evidence, ie blood, so dna can be matched, she is not sent in to confirm that Eddie has alerted to blood! That would fly in the face of the possibility of someone who bled and then died

Again, where is your back up for the emboldened statement of yours? You said previously this is according to Grime. Awaiting quote. Thanks.

And, proof that Mr Grime presumes no such thing if both dogs alert in th same place is his words in his report about the car search.....in his opinion:

It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to 'cadaver scent'
contaminant or human blood scent.

Eddie has been trained to find two different scents -  one is from dried blood and the other is cadaverscent - and that is the limit of his 'knowledge' -  and if he comes across either of those scents he will alert.    Whether he is alerting to a dead body or dried blood from a dead person (or a living person)  is not something he can convey to his handler.             If he could  - then MG would have trained him to bark once for blood and twice for cadaverscent - which he plainly has not.

If you listen to MG in the videos - he carefully avoids mentioning cadaverscent when Eddie alerts - and instead says that'' Eddie has alerted to the things he has been trained to alert to ''. (not verbatim).   If he was sure it was cadaverscent - he would have said so.  At no stage does MG ever claim that his dog has alerted to cadaverscent - only to the 'possiblity''.

If you don't accept the abilities/training of the dogs as explained by M.G - then I don't see the point in further discussion.

Eddie alerts to both blood and cadaverscent.  There is no way he can let his handler know which one he is alerting to.

Keela only alerts to blood - therefore she can convey to her handler what it is she is alerting to.


 

[Rogerandout]

You have got it wrong yet again. Eddie (the cadaver dog) is sent in to find the remnant scent of a body, not blood. Keela is only sent in after he alerts to find back up forensic evidence, ie blood, so dna can be matched, she is not sent in to confirm that Eddie has alerted to blood! That would fly in the face of the possibility of someone who bled and then died

Again, where is your back up for the emboldened statement of yours about what Grime presumes? You said previously this is according to Grime. Awaiting quote. Thanks. On second thoughts dont bother, if it existed you would have produced it by now after being asked twice. All it is is your personal mistaken take.

And, proof that Mr Grime presumes no such thing if both dogs alert in the same place is his words in his report about the car search.....in his opinion:

It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to 'cadaver scent'
contaminant or human blood scent.

Also take note that in the 5a flat search where both dogs alerted he did not say there was a possibility Eddie was alerting to blood, he said in his opinion the alerts were suggestive of cadaver scent....


Have to go out now

Edited

If I said that my shopping bag contained apples or oranges, could you be sure that there were apples in there- no!

Eddie's alerts are only suggestive of cadaver scent when blood is excluded by Keela.

[ferryman]

According to Grime, Eddie did not react to pseudo-scents.

It is true that dogs trained on human bodies don't.

However, this reference from the Sam Parker case has always intrigued me:

http://www.scentevidence.com/2009/07/dog-debate-at-center-of-murder-case.html

(will add in an edit)

We also saw video played in the courtroom to demonstrate how another dog, Eddie, found a sample pair of pants hidden in the Walker County Jail that was perfumed with a cadaver scent. Eddie is an English Springer Spaniel belonging to Martin Grime, a world-renown forensic K-9 expert based in the United Kingdom.

Sample pair of pants perfumed with a cadaver scent

Would that be a pseudo-scent?

[Lyall]

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?

It's you who makes the error by making conclusions from dogs alerting "in the same place".

[Lyall]

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.

Plenty of those you ally yourself with do indeed periodically claim dogs will alert to toenails, and all kinds of other material too.

[Rogerandout]

It's you who makes the error by making conclusions from dogs alerting "in the same place".

Care to explain....?

[Rogerandout]

Plenty of those you ally yourself with do indeed periodically claim dogs will alert to toenails, and all kinds of other material too.

I don't ally myself to anyone. I criticise Pros as well as [ censored word]. You may choose to see me as allied to others, but I am very much an outsider- banned from pro and anti fora alike. Because I speak the truth, not promote false belief.

[Lyall]

Care to explain....?

I did in the post you were replying to - how can it be said dogs are alerting 'in the same place' when there could be two or more microscopic spots of material next to each other?

One dog alerts to one invisible to us spot and the other dog to another, but they're not alerting to the same material.

[Lyall]

I don't ally myself to anyone. I criticise Pros as well as [ censored word]. You may choose to see me as allied to others, but I am very much an outsider- banned from pro and anti fora alike. Because I speak the truth, not promote false belief.

You devote a huge amount of time to the dogs. Did you devote any time to, for instance, Sadie's theories?

[pegasus]

Re the demonstration in LaFayette Police Department I can't find whether it was using imported trousers contacted by a real source, or by trousers with synthetic scent applied. Wish we could see the video.

In that Sam Parker case Eddie indicated in the garage and that's his indication that was relevant to that case.
It is interesting that in the same search Eddie also indicated at a nearby house. This house had long ago been burnt out and never repaired. It turned out that when the house burnt, there had been a fatality, so this is yet another testimony of Eddie's remarkable ability.

[Rogerandout]

I did in the post you were replying to - how can it be said dogs are alerting 'in the same place' when there could be two or more microscopic spots of material next to each other?

One dog alerts to one invisible to us spot and the other dog to another, but they're not alerting to the same material.

that is a problem with all measurement- dog or instrument- defining the locus.

All we know is that if Eddie alerts it could be blood or cadaver- if Keela also alerts it suggests blood rather than cadaver because of the greater likelihood of blood. If Keela does react it increases the value of the intelligence that it may be cadaver scent. No alerts can ever confirm either cadaver or blood.

[Lyall]

that is a problem with all measurement- dog or instrument- defining the locus.

All we know is that if Eddie alerts it could be blood or cadaver- if Keela also alerts it suggests blood rather than cadaver because of the greater likelihood of blood. If Keela does react it increases the value of the intelligence that it may be cadaver scent. No alerts can ever confirm either cadaver or blood.

Fair enough, but you won't leave it at that. You'll still do everything you can to claim dogs aren't trained, and used, by professionals - and you won't recognise that some US states have determined this is a science worthy of being heard as evidence - like any other forensic science - in the courtroom.