Are Victim Detection and Forensic Evidence Search Dogs reliable?

[gilet]

I have not read any posts on here which state that Martin Grime`s reports are "definite proof that a child died in the apartment"

Where are these posts? Who are these people?

Again we get a lecture assuming that reports haven`t been read carefully enough and wrong conclusions are being drawn.........What conclusions?

What does seem to be the case is that SY have recently suggested Madeleine may not have been alive when she left the apartment.............This as separate from the "is alive or sadly dead" of previous comments.

It is not unreasonable to bring into the discussion the deployment of the dogs in relation to that.

A careful analysis of my post will make it clear that I have not stated that there are any people on this forum foolish enough to claim that Martin Grime's reports are conclusive proof of anyone's death in that apartment. I have not read every post here and do not claim to have evidence of any such thing. My post was more general in it's implications. There is a misunderstanding more generally about the nature of the work of the dogs, that was clear in the many news articles back in 2007 which jumped to unfortunate conclusions and from a persistence in the commentary by certain groups in other places about the subject. It does no harm to remind everyone that Martin Grime himself was adamant that there was no evidence to support the claim, and that his dogs merely provide indications "must" be supported by other evidence.

More widely still, have you not noticed that there are people who accept Amaral's conclusion based on his failure to grasp either the Grime report or the DNA report (or both) that Madeleine is dead? I am rather surprised if that is the case.

It is a simple statement of fact that there is no proof of anyone having died in Apartment 5A or that any cadaver was transported in the McCann hire car. And to claim otherwise does suggest a less than proper understanding of the reports.

So we now see that SY have confirmed the reality that Madeleine may be alive or dead, albeit using slightly different wording.  All those people who have read the Grime report properly understand that fact.

But there are others,  such as Amaral and those who claim that his investigation team did a good job and that his definitive conclusion that Madeleine is dead is sensible, who apparently do not accept the logical conclusion based on the Grime report and all the other inconclusive evidence that she may just in fact still be alive.

Scotland Yard have not suggested that she  may not be alive have they? Their investigation is still looking at all possibilities as far as I can see.



 

 

[John]

Imagine having to sniff for dead bodies for a living, I hope they were well paid.

[gilet]

I take issue based on the clear statements of Martin Grime with this sentence in your post.

Both dogs alerting means blood was detected not a cadaver. Dogs are used in tandem. Eddie alerts then Keela checks. If Eddie alerts without Keela = cadaver scent'

I do not believe there is any documentation from Grime which suggests this is the truth and it is this belief which is incorrect which confuses the issue and suggests that there is some kind of proof that a death occurred in Apartment 5A for example..

What Martin Grime is very clear to point out is that if Eddie alerts without Keela that results in the possibility of Cadaver Scent and is not definitive proof that Cadaver Scent is present.

My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant.

He goes on to say that the alert from the dog may also be the result of cross-contamination at the scene and that no evidential reliability can be placed on the alerts as they stand.

Amaral, for example, seems to ignore these rather important qualifications within the Grime report.

[Wonderfulspam]

A careful analysis of my post will make it clear that I have not stated that there are any people on this forum foolish enough to claim that Martin Grime's reports are conclusive proof of anyone's death in that apartment. I have not read every post here and do not claim to have evidence of any such thing. My post was more general in it's implications. There is a misunderstanding more generally about the nature of the work of the dogs, that was clear in the many news articles back in 2007 which jumped to unfortunate conclusions and from a persistence in the commentary by certain groups in other places about the subject. It does no harm to remind everyone that Martin Grime himself was adamant that there was no evidence to support the claim, and that his dogs merely provide indications "must" be supported by other evidence.

More widely still, have you not noticed that there are people who accept Amaral's conclusion based on his failure to grasp either the Grime report or the DNA report (or both) that Madeleine is dead? I am rather surprised if that is the case.

It is a simple statement of fact that there is no proof of anyone having died in Apartment 5A or that any cadaver was transported in the McCann hire car. And to claim otherwise does suggest a less than proper understanding of the reports.

So we now see that SY have confirmed the reality that Madeleine may be alive or dead, albeit using slightly different wording.  All those people who have read the Grime report properly understand that fact.

But there are others,  such as Amaral and those who claim that his investigation team did a good job and that his definitive conclusion that Madeleine is dead is sensible, who apparently do not accept the logical conclusion based on the Grime report and all the other inconclusive evidence that she may just in fact still be alive.

Scotland Yard have not suggested that she  may not be alive have they? Their investigation is still looking at all possibilities as far as I can see.

Scotland Yard have not suggested that she  may not be alive have they?


So how many age progressed photos of her did you see on Crimewatch?

Don't seem to be making a great deal of effort on that front really do they.

The girl has been frozen in time, or fridge, as a 3 year old.

[Carana]

You can't blame the dogs because of the actions of a few idiotic senior investigating officers.

What humans understand is not always what animals are trying to communicate.

[gilet]

Just two small points

1
 How come the CSI team so singularly failed to pick up on any trace of blood?

2.

The PJ was offered the services of Keela as early as late May 2007.  How come that offer was turned down at the time?

1. I understood that there was blood detected in Apartment 5A at a location alerted to by both Eddie and Keela (behind the sofa?) and this was found not to be from a McCann. I also understand that blood was found on the key fob in the car right by the driver's door where Eddie did his alerting. This was found to be specifically from Gerry McCann I believe.

2. I did not know that the services of these specific dogs (which in May were still actual police dogs) was offered back in May 2007. Do you have a link to that information?  But I have no idea why the PJ under the co-ordination of Amaral at the time would have failed to make use of the dogs so early when they may have been of far more use than in August when a number of other families had lived in the apartment and it had presumably been cleaned literally dozens of times.  I find it just as bizarre the reasons given by Amaral for his team's refusal to do a reconstruction at the earliest opportunity.

[gilet]

What humans understand is not always what animals are trying to communicate.

And conversely what animals understand is not always what humans are trying to communicate.

[ferryman]

1. I understood that there was blood detected in Apartment 5A at a location alerted to by both Eddie and Keela (behind the sofa?) and this was found not to be from a McCann. I also understand that blood was found on the key fob in the car right by the driver's door where Eddie did his alerting. This was found to be specifically from Gerry McCann I believe.

2. I did not know that the services of these specific dogs (which in May were still actual police dogs) was offered back in May 2007. Do you have a link to that information?  But I have no idea why the PJ under the co-ordination of Amaral at the time would have failed to make use of the dogs so early when they may have been of far more use than in August when a number of other families had lived in the apartment and it had presumably been cleaned literally dozens of times.  I find it just as bizarre the reasons given by Amaral for his team's refusal to do a reconstruction at the earliest opportunity.

Only stuff reacted to by Keela was sent to the FSS, suggesting that everything sent to the FSS had a component of blood.

For example, no clothing was sent and Keela didn't react to any clothing.

[gilet]

Scotland Yard have not suggested that she  may not be alive have they?


So how many age progressed photos of her did you see on Crimewatch?

Don't seem to be making a great deal of effort on that front really do they.

The girl has been frozen in time, or fridge, as a 3 year old.

So, because during one extremely brief update the public was exposed only to one of the most famous images of the child, you conclude that the direction of the SY investigation has changed. You don't think it might simply have been that in such a short report it was better to use the known image to get the focus of the public on the issue more immediately? Your second-guessing the motive for the use of this particular picture is simply that, guesswork.

As you are presumably fully aware, though apparently reluctant to admit it, the answer to my question is clear. There has been no suggestion from anyone at SY or for that matter the Oporto PJ Investigation team that they are doing anything other than continuing in the work they have been doing for some time, that is searching for a missing child who may be dead but also may be alive.

[gilet]

Only stuff reacted to by Keela was sent to the FSS, suggesting that everything sent to the FSS had a component of blood.

For example, no clothing was sent and Keela didn't react to any clothing.

Yes, Grime is clear about that in his report where he states that no human remains (or potential human remains) were found so there was nothing to analyse. He still went on to make it clear that the alerts were only "suggestive" of cadaver scent and could not be definitive evidence of such.

[jassi]

So, because during one extremely brief update the public was exposed only to one of the most famous images of the child, you conclude that the direction of the SY investigation has changed. You don't think it might simply have been that in such a short report it was better to use the known image to get the focus of the public on the issue more immediately? Your second guessing the motive for the use of this particular picture is simply that, guesswork.

As you are presumably fully aware, though apparently reluctant to admit it, the answer to my question is clear. There has been no suggestion from anyone at SY or for that matter the Oporto PJ Investigation team that they are doing anything other than continuing in the work they have been doing for some time, that is searching for a missing child who may be dead but also may be alive.

Are they doing that, or are they looking for a perpetrator ?
The two things are not necessarily the same. and finding one may not lead to the other.

[Estuarine]

If ever we needed proof that the Brits are nation of dog lovers look no further than here.
No less than seven woofer threads now, all going round like giant Oozlum Birds finally to disappear.....well you know the legend.
And as if it were some kind of portent when I was driving back from wherever I had been today I saw silver Peugeot coupe thing registration plate K9 O00F. Cool

[gilet]

Are they doing that, or are they looking for a perpetrator ?
The two things are not necessarily the same. and finding one may not lead to the other.

You are absolutely correct to differentiate between the two possibilities. But from the statements made by both organisations over the last year or so I believe they are doing searching for the child and also attempting to find the perpetrator. However the search for a missing child was specifically relevant to the post I was making and its connection to the question as to whether the dog alerts prove the death of Madeleine or not, and therefore I mentioned that.

[Carew]

A careful analysis of my post will make it clear that I have not stated that there are any people on this forum foolish enough to claim that Martin Grime's reports are conclusive proof of anyone's death in that apartment. I have not read every post here and do not claim to have evidence of any such thing. My post was more general in it's implications. There is a misunderstanding more generally about the nature of the work of the dogs, that was clear in the many news articles back in 2007 which jumped to unfortunate conclusions and from a persistence in the commentary by certain groups in other places about the subject. It does no harm to remind everyone that Martin Grime himself was adamant that there was no evidence to support the claim, and that his dogs merely provide indications "must" be supported by other evidence.

More widely still, have you not noticed that there are people who accept Amaral's conclusion based on his failure to grasp either the Grime report or the DNA report (or both) that Madeleine is dead? I am rather surprised if that is the case.

It is a simple statement of fact that there is no proof of anyone having died in Apartment 5A or that any cadaver was transported in the McCann hire car. And to claim otherwise does suggest a less than proper understanding of the reports.

So we now see that SY have confirmed the reality that Madeleine may be alive or dead, albeit using slightly different wording.  All those people who have read the Grime report properly understand that fact.

But there are others,  such as Amaral and those who claim that his investigation team did a good job and that his definitive conclusion that Madeleine is dead is sensible, who apparently do not accept the logical conclusion based on the Grime report and all the other inconclusive evidence that she may just in fact still be alive.

Scotland Yard have not suggested that she  may not be alive have they? Their investigation is still looking at all possibilities as far as I can see.

Yes, Gilet......careful analysis of your post had already made it clear that you hadn`t stated any names or posts...............otherwise I wouldn`t have asked you to clarify who you meant when you said:-

"That some people (and I would include the initial PJ reaction in this) take this report as definitive proof that a child died in that apartment indicates to me that those people have either not read the report carefully enough or have not done so with a genuinely open mind as to what conclusions can be drawn from the report."



Anyone who has read the reports carefully enough,......... as you suggest we do........ and has an open mind will be aware that recent comments from SY now include that Madeleine may not have been alive when she left the apartment..........and it is not unreasonable to look at what may have led them to look at this possibility.

[Carew]

If ever we needed proof that the Brits are nation of dog lovers look no further than here.
No less than seven woofer threads now, all going round like giant Oozlum Birds finally to disappear.....well you know the legend.
And as if it were some kind of portent when I was driving back from wherever I had been today I saw silver Peugeot coupe thing registration plate K9 O00F. Cool

I think maybe many of the dog- lovers  discussing the Madeleine case might love them and their handler a bit more had they alerted somewhere.........anywhere...........other than around the McCanns!      (imo of course)