Author Topic: The inspection of the McCann's clothing by dogs Keela and Eddie in the gym.  (Read 44721 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Benice

Just a reminder that a signal of a person's clothes does not incriminate that person.

This is true Pegasus - as illustrated by the alert to Sean's red top.   

That top is described in the report as being Madeleine's top.   It clearly isn't -  and IMO is an example of evidence being 'manipulated' to fit in with a certain theory. 
The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

ferryman

  • Guest
For me the key point about all the items Eddie picked up is that no dog attending a crime scene should have physical contact with stuff it is tasked to inspect.

Even more so, both dogs trampling all over clothing, in both the villa and the gym.

stephen25000

  • Guest
You continue to ignore the FACT that Martin Grime himself is not sure that the alerts are genuine...that FACT really scuppers any argument re the dogs


Argue as you like, it does not dismiss the possibility that the dogs indicated correctly, and that's what sticks in your craw.

Offline Mr Gray


Argue as you like, it does not dismiss the possibility that the dogs indicated correctly, and that's what sticks in your craw.
not at all...a possibility..yes im happy to accept that

Offline Mr Gray

Try this one Stephen...Question to Martin Grime from the rogs...actual quotes...

'Based upon your experience with the dogs, can you specify whether the positive signals given by them have always matched the scientific results''


Martin grimes response...

" I cannot"

Do you need it clearer than that.

Offline Carana

What happened to everyone's underwear? There's only one pair of a lady's knickers in the photos. I don't recall underwear in the video...





Offline Carana

Something that seems a bit odd. The clothes inspection was the only one in which Keela was wheeled in before Eddie... except once:

7. The clothes packed in the box labelled "couple's bedroom 2" was inspected by the cadaver dog between 01h20 and 01h22, then the blood dog between 01h23 and 01h25. Nothing abnormal was detected by either dog.

??

Was this a mistake in taking notes, or was the order changed?

Pages 2100-2102

Official record of the canine inspection at 23h20 on 2 August 2007 at the Municipal Pavilion of Lagos, [situated in] Lagos.

The ten participants are indicated as being five PJ Chief Inspectors (2)/Inspectors (3); The UK NPIA officer (Harrison); the UK dog handler (Grime); the Portuguese-speaking officer from Scotland Yard (Freitas); and the two UK English Springer spaniels - Eddy and Kila.

Following the search effected at Rua das Flores, 27, during which certain items were seized, this present inspection was performed, in a place appropriated for its purpose, attempting to identify particular pieces of clothing possibly indicated by the dogs, namely Eddy [that] indicates cadaver odours and Kila [that] indicates blood odours.

In these terms, the pieces of clothing recovered [from the home] were laid out individually in accordance with instructions given by the British technicians, the dogs [then] walking the area where they [those pieces of clothing] were laid out by order and with the following results described below.

1. Between 23h20 and 23h30 the two dogs were allowed to reconoitre the entire area to guarantee that there were no existing odours - and none were detected by them.

2. Between 23h30 and 23h40 items from the box labelled 'common room' were inspected by the blood dog without result.
- At 23h41 the cadaver dog began its inspection and 'marked' some clothing on the edge of the area. The inspection ended at 23h52 with the clothing having been collected for later direct examination and photographic report.

3. Clothes from the box labelled Lounge ("sitting room") were inspected by the blood dog between 00h02 (now 3 August) and 00h05 without any result. The same clothes were inspected by the cadaver dog between 00h06 and 00h07 also without any result.

4. Then the suitcase labelled 'Twins bedroom' was inspected, followed by two sets of inspections of its contents due to the large number of individual pieces it contained: the blood dog inspected [the first set] between 00h12 and 00h15, and then [the second set] between 00h22 and 00h24 - both without any result.
The cadaver dog inspected [set one] between 00h16 and 00h17, then [set two] between 00h25 and 00h26, also without any result.

5. An empty suitcase labelled 'Visitors bedroom' was inspected, along with sundry clothing packed in a box labelled Outside Clothes rack. Between 00h40 and 00h43 the blood dog inspected without any result, and in its turn the cadaver dog inspected between 00h44 and 00h45, also without any result.

6. The clothes packed in the box labelled "couple's bedroom 1" was inspected by the blood dog between 00h51 and 00h55, while the cadaver dog inspected it between 00h56 and 0057 without any result from either dog.
because there were so many pieces of clothing in the box a second inspection was conducted between 01h04 and 01h07 by the blood dog, and between 01h08 and 01h09 by the cadaver dog, [again] without any result from either dog.

7. The clothes packed in the box labelled "couple's bedroom 2" was inspected by the cadaver dog between 01h20 and 01h22, then the blood dog between 01h23 and 01h25. Nothing abnormal was detected by either dog.

Attached, the photo report which immediately follows and the video recording on MiniDV cassette.

There being nothing more the activity stopped at 01h30.

This document is drawn up to ratify the truth of the above and it is going to be signed by all participants.
(three signatures appended; five missing)

ferryman

  • Guest
Something that seems a bit odd. The clothes inspection was the only one in which Keela was wheeled in before Eddie... except once:

7. The clothes packed in the box labelled "couple's bedroom 2" was inspected by the cadaver dog between 01h20 and 01h22, then the blood dog between 01h23 and 01h25. Nothing abnormal was detected by either dog.

??

Was this a mistake in taking notes, or was the order changed?

Pages 2100-2102

Official record of the canine inspection at 23h20 on 2 August 2007 at the Municipal Pavilion of Lagos, [situated in] Lagos.

The ten participants are indicated as being five PJ Chief Inspectors (2)/Inspectors (3); The UK NPIA officer (Harrison); the UK dog handler (Grime); the Portuguese-speaking officer from Scotland Yard (Freitas); and the two UK English Springer spaniels - Eddy and Kila.

Following the search effected at Rua das Flores, 27, during which certain items were seized, this present inspection was performed, in a place appropriated for its purpose, attempting to identify particular pieces of clothing possibly indicated by the dogs, namely Eddy [that] indicates cadaver odours and Kila [that] indicates blood odours.

In these terms, the pieces of clothing recovered [from the home] were laid out individually in accordance with instructions given by the British technicians, the dogs [then] walking the area where they [those pieces of clothing] were laid out by order and with the following results described below.

1. Between 23h20 and 23h30 the two dogs were allowed to reconoitre the entire area to guarantee that there were no existing odours - and none were detected by them.

2. Between 23h30 and 23h40 items from the box labelled 'common room' were inspected by the blood dog without result.
- At 23h41 the cadaver dog began its inspection and 'marked' some clothing on the edge of the area. The inspection ended at 23h52 with the clothing having been collected for later direct examination and photographic report.

3. Clothes from the box labelled Lounge ("sitting room") were inspected by the blood dog between 00h02 (now 3 August) and 00h05 without any result. The same clothes were inspected by the cadaver dog between 00h06 and 00h07 also without any result.

4. Then the suitcase labelled 'Twins bedroom' was inspected, followed by two sets of inspections of its contents due to the large number of individual pieces it contained: the blood dog inspected [the first set] between 00h12 and 00h15, and then [the second set] between 00h22 and 00h24 - both without any result.
The cadaver dog inspected [set one] between 00h16 and 00h17, then [set two] between 00h25 and 00h26, also without any result.

5. An empty suitcase labelled 'Visitors bedroom' was inspected, along with sundry clothing packed in a box labelled Outside Clothes rack. Between 00h40 and 00h43 the blood dog inspected without any result, and in its turn the cadaver dog inspected between 00h44 and 00h45, also without any result.

6. The clothes packed in the box labelled "couple's bedroom 1" was inspected by the blood dog between 00h51 and 00h55, while the cadaver dog inspected it between 00h56 and 0057 without any result from either dog.
because there were so many pieces of clothing in the box a second inspection was conducted between 01h04 and 01h07 by the blood dog, and between 01h08 and 01h09 by the cadaver dog, [again] without any result from either dog.

7. The clothes packed in the box labelled "couple's bedroom 2" was inspected by the cadaver dog between 01h20 and 01h22, then the blood dog between 01h23 and 01h25. Nothing abnormal was detected by either dog.

Attached, the photo report which immediately follows and the video recording on MiniDV cassette.

There being nothing more the activity stopped at 01h30.

This document is drawn up to ratify the truth of the above and it is going to be signed by all participants.
(three signatures appended; five missing)


Interesting spot.

Most likely to be a recording error, I would say ...

ETA:

Something else interesting is that there was no gap between completion of reconnoitre and commencement of search, tending to suggest that the clothes were laid out before the recoinnoitre, making a mockery of the reconnoitre.

Why was not any apparent scent detected during reconnoitre?
« Last Edit: March 16, 2014, 12:08:49 PM by ferryman »

Offline Carana

Interesting spot.

Most likely to be a recording error, I would say ...

Possibly, but what on earth happened to everyone's underwear? Were these also mistakes in notes / video clips... or were they left out?

If they were left out... why?

What's the idea there? There weren't any (aside from one pair of lady's knickers)?? In which case, if that is supposed to be accurate, no member of the the occupants of that villa, whose clothing was taken, ever wore any underwear... How likely is that?

« Last Edit: March 16, 2014, 12:23:09 PM by Carana »

Offline pegasus

Can anyone match items on the dining table in Eddie villa video, with PJ photos of items in the box labelled "living area" ?

P.S. How about pillows?
« Last Edit: March 16, 2014, 02:55:19 PM by pegasus »

Offline Carana

There was only ladies panties, but why only Kates undies?
 The babies were still in nappies, but surely Maddy would have spare panties, but why check any underwear? I believe there was no beachwear either.

No beachwear for anyone, one pair of ladies' knickers, no bras (let alone a sports bra), no men's undies, few - if any - clothes attributable to Madeleine.

If they were checking all clothing, why not underwear? There was one pair of knickers... why just that one?

Either the family:

- Never wore any
- Threw away everyone's underwear (bar one item) for some unfathomable reason before the dog team arrived
- Set aside elasticated materials for a gentle wash and spin, which weren't recuperated / examined

Or the police team didn't find any:

- Underwear / beachwear for anyone

Or, if the PJ/ Grime team had done:

- They were excluded for some reason.


A question: would Eddie have reacted or not to dirty laundry, if he'd been encouraged to concentrate?
« Last Edit: March 16, 2014, 02:48:58 PM by Carana »

Offline sadie

BUMPED

Quote from: Anna on Today at 02:14:42 PM
Quote
There was only ladies panties, but why only Kates undies?
 The babies were still in nappies, but surely Maddy would have spare panties, but why check any underwear? I believe there was no beachwear either.[


Carana:
No beachwear for anyone, one pair of ladies' knickers, no bras (let alone a sports bra), no men's undies, few - if any - clothes attributable to Madeleine.

If they were checking all clothing, why not underwear? There was one pair of knickers... why just that one?

Either the family:

- Never wore any
- Threw away everyone's underwear (bar one item) for some unfathomable reason before the dog team arrived
- Set aside elasticated materials for a gentle wash and spin, which weren't recuperated / examined

Or the police team didn't find any:

- Underwear / beachwear for anyone

Or, if the PJ/ Grime team had done:

- They were excluded for some reason.


A question: would Eddie have reacted or not to dirty laundry, if he'd been encouraged to concentrate?
« Last Edit: Today at 02:48:58 PM by Carana »

Offline pegasus

No beachwear for anyone....
The PJ photos in the files are of only the clothing etc from the living area (lounge/dining room).
The other 90%+ of the clothing in the villa ( from the parents bedroom, the childrens bedroom, the guest bedroom, and the drying rack) are not shown in the photographs.

Offline sadie

The PJ photos in the files are of only the clothing etc from the living area (lounge/dining room).
The other 90%+ of the clothing in the villa ( from the parents bedroom, the childrens bedroom, the guest bedroom, and the drying rack) are not shown in the photographs.
I like your style Pegasus.  You really work at checking things out  8((()*/

Offline Carana

The PJ photos in the files are of only the clothing etc from the living area (lounge/dining room).
The other 90%+ of the clothing in the villa ( from the parents bedroom, the childrens bedroom, the guest bedroom, and the drying rack) are not shown in the photographs.

Why not?