Are Victim Detection and Forensic Evidence Search Dogs reliable?

[gilet]

Clearly you didn't read what I wrote.  "I suppose time will tell if new forensic findings are forthcoming."
I wasn't commenting on what any forensics might reveal.

Actually, it is you who has clearly not bothered to read the post I made.

My post was entirely about the possibility or more likely not of the findings ever being made public (ie forthcoming).

I made no reference, as you mistakenly believe, as to what the forensics might actually reveal. I qualified my belief that the likelihood of details of any such tests might be forthcoming is extremely low with the rider that only if they prove to be of value then they might well be touched upon in a court case, though I do admit that the syntax of the sentence while accurate and effective in portraying my belief was a little complex.

Unfortunately though, you appear to have got the wrong end of the stick entirely.

[jassi]

Actually, it is you who has clearly not bothered to read the post I made.

My post was entirely about the possibility or more likely not of the findings ever being made public (ie forthcoming).

I made no reference, as you mistakenly believe, as to what the forensics might actually reveal. I qualified my belief that the likelihood of details of any such tests might be forthcoming is extremely low with the rider that only if they prove to be of value then they might well be touched upon in a court case, though I do admit that the syntax of the sentence while accurate and effective in portraying my belief was a little complex.

Unfortunately though, you appear to have got the wrong end of the stick entirely.

It must be the way you tell it 

[gilet]

It must be the way you tell it 

Possibly. Over twenty years working as a civil servant in the heart of London for two of the major Departments of State may well have coloured my prose. I freely admit that.

[Victoria]

I sincerely doubt that any 'samples' are being tested as part of the enquiry at present and would be extremely wary of anyone who claimed to have insider information without seeing thorough and conclusive proof of their integrity.

[sadie]

Whipped?  There was no reaction from the dog when he entered the other apartments Sadie, what would you have wanted him to do exactly?

A bit like the car wasn't it?  Lots of cueing to the dog and loads of time given. 


Gawd knows how Eddie smelled the cadavar odour through the seal of a car door when he couldn't smell the odour of CCat in that part opened cupboard, nor any scent until his nose was almost on the folders/ paper/ clothes/ counter. which ever.

I am afraid that I have to say this. 

Either the man who bled badly from his shaving hadn't cleaned up properly
OR cadavar odour was planted in the apartment, in the villa and along the bottom of the car door

Unless it was the blood of the shaving accident that Eddie smelt  .... The whole scenario stinks to me  tbh



Could poor Martin Grimes, a Brit, an ex Police Officer, have been set up as the " fall guy" ? 


Let us not forget that Amaral is not past dirty tricks. 
In an effort to get Gerry to confess to something he hadn't done, he (his men) told him that the PJ had absolute proof that a dead Madeleine was carried in the hire car.  We all know that was a lie. 
Also he is a convicted criminal for perjury.  Lying again. 


Did he tell loads of lies in the Joana case ?  Seems the main Judge didn't believe quite a lot of it and one of the Judges was truly upset that there was a gross Miscarriage of Justice



Think about it:
DOG CAN
1)  Smell odour thru the seal of a car door designed to be totally watertight and draught proof. etc?  .... Can he?

DOG CAN'T
1)  Smell odour through a part open door in a room (Mccanns villa)? .... or even smell odour on the counter top until his nose is right on top of the small? .... Why cant he, if he can smell it thru a sealed car door ?

Think about it.



It doesn't add up.

[ferryman]

Could poor Martin Grimes, a Brit, an ex Police Officer, have been set up as the " fall guy" ? 

Grime wouldn't have had to work as hard as he did work to get a reaction if anything had been planted ...

[stephen25000]

A bit like the car wasn't it?  Lots of cueing to the dog and loads of time given. 


Gawd knows how Eddie smelled the cadavar odour through the seal of a car door when he couldn't smell the odour of CCat in that part opened cupboard, nor any scent until his nose was almost on the folders/ paper/ clothes/ counter. which ever.

I am afraid that I have to say this. 

Either the man who bled badly from his shaving hadn't cleaned up properly
OR cadavar odour was planted in the apartment, in the villa and along the bottom of the car door

Unless it was the blood of the shaving accident that Eddie smelt  .... The whole scenario stinks to me  tbh



Could poor Martin Grimes, a Brit, an ex Police Officer, have been set up as the " fall guy" ? 


Let us not forget that Amaral is not past dirty tricks. 
In an effort to get Gerry to confess to something he hadn't done, he (his men) told him that the PJ had absolute proof that a dead Madeleine was carried in the hire car.  We all know that was a lie. 
Also he is a convicted criminal for perjury.  Lying again. 


Did he tell loads of lies in the Joana case ?  Seems the main Judge didn't believe quite a lot of it and one of the Judges was truly upset that there was a gross Miscarriage of Justice



Think about it:
DOG CAN
1)  Smell odour thru the seal of a car door designed to be totally watertight and draught proof. etc?  .... Can he?

DOG CAN'T
1)  Smell odour through a part open door in a room (Mccanns villa)? .... or even smell odour on the counter top until his nose is right on top of the small? .... Why cant he, if he can smell it thru a sealed car door ?

Think about it.



It doesn't add up.

'................OR cadavar odour was planted in the apartment, in the villa and along the bottom of the car door'


 8-)(--)

[Carana]

Don't you think it would he a  good thing for any samples to be re-tested, using improved techniques  ?

If the police are taking this very sensible step, then surely we must all welcome it 

I don't understand why you are being so combative about what is potentially excellent news

I would find that highly constructive, if true.

However, I'm still waiting for news (5 years on) of supposed forensic analyses underway of certain other aspects that never materialised. Hence my questions.

[Carana]

I sincerely doubt that any 'samples' are being tested as part of the enquiry at present and would be extremely wary of anyone who claimed to have insider information without seeing thorough and conclusive proof of their integrity.

There might be, and, indeed, I would hope so. However, at the moment, this remains a forum rumour.

"Dabbling with my sources..." comes to mind.

[Silkywhiskers]

Of course they have done further work on the "samples".

SOMETHING has led them to believe Madeleine is dead.

Common sense and diligence REQUIRES the samples to be retested.

It amuses me at the contortions Team McCann are now stooping to - someone PLANTED cadaverine on the Renault?

ANYTHING, anything but acknowledge the likely truth....which is staring us all in the face right now...

[sadie]

Of course they have done further work on the "samples".

SOMETHING has led them to believe Madeleine is dead.

Common sense and diligence REQUIRES the samples to be retested.

It amuses me at the contortions Team McCann are now stooping to - someone PLANTED cadaverine on the Renault?

ANYTHING, anything but acknowledge the likely truth....which is staring us all in the face right now...

How come Eddie could scent thru a closed and sealed car door designed to keep rain and splashed up water out, yet couldn't scent thru an open cabinet door? .... Or the stuff on the top of the counter until his nose was actually virtually on it?

[Carana]

Of course they have done further work on the "samples".

SOMETHING has led them to believe Madeleine is dead.

Common sense and diligence REQUIRES the samples to be retested.

It amuses me at the contortions Team McCann are now stooping to - someone PLANTED cadaverine on the Renault?

ANYTHING, anything but acknowledge the likely truth....which is staring us all in the face right now...

I don't follow. What are you talking about? Could you provide a reliable cite to the files as to where any "cadaverine" was actually found?

[Carana]

That's me naive and stupid.
Nonetheless I still don't understand why you are rabbiting on about Mr Grime and who on this forum said what in that connection. What gives now is that if the current investigators use dogs it will be because they believe the dogs are useful tool regardless of your research; unless of course you are acknowledged world authority on the topic. In that unlikely event I will take it all back.

I expect that there will be dogs. They are an asset to help find physical evidence of whatever the police are looking for.

[sadie]

Removed as abusive

The dogs are very capable, but I still wonder about how come Eddie could smell  something through the seals of a car door designed to be absolutely water and draft proof ...  yet Eddie could not smell anything when his nose was just inches away from Ccat, which was hidden behind a partailly open door.  And why with such immense ability to smell scents he had to have his nose virtually on the exact spot on the counter before he could smell any scent.

It all seems very fishy to me, but then I am not an expert

[gilet]

Is that boasting or complaining?
Colour me gone!

Neither.

Specifically, it was 'explaining'.

Perhaps you did not refer back to the previous post where the complexity of syntax in my posts was being discussed. Had you done so you may have been able to understand the reason I was giving the explanation.

As for your latter rather American sounding phrase, hardly deserving of the term 'sentence', I take it means that I should presume you to have left the debating arena. Should that be the case then I am afraid that you disappoint me in that such a hit and run post hardly looks to have been worth the effort espcially in that it was premised on the fact that you had not bothered to discover the actual reason for the comment you so hastily derided.