Are Victim Detection and Forensic Evidence Search Dogs reliable?

[jassi]

Many loft hatches have rubber seals to prevent downward draughts, so possibly even more difficult to detect scents.

[Alfred R Jones]

OK so assuming 3 feet from the hatch, that means the airflow distance from target to Buster's nose was about 10 feet right? And the airflow through the gaps around the loft hatchdoor was by "chimney effect" mostly upwards.

If that's the case then why did the whole house stink by the time the time the body was found?

"By the time it was recovered, when the stench of decomposition was overwhelming...,"


"It took another two days, until officers noticed a stench in rooms at the top of the house, for Tia to be found".

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324061/Tia-Sharp-Met-forced-apologise-family-FOUR-searches-failed-spot-body.html#ixzz37eEGl1sQ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[pegasus]

The reason is that the police had totally ignored Buster positively signalling the loft two days earlier on Aug 8th. And yes I have a link for that, I will post it shortly.

[pegasus]

From another thread:

If that's the case then why did the whole house stink by the time the time the body was found?

"By the time it was recovered, when the stench of decomposition was overwhelming...,"

"It took another two days, until officers noticed a stench in rooms at the top of the house, for Tia to be found".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324061/Tia-Sharp-Met-forced-apologise-family-FOUR-searches-failed-spot-body.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324061/Tia-Sharp-Met-forced-apologise-family-FOUR-searches-failed-spot-body.html

Yes, thanks for that excellent article. I just want to highlight that when Buster signalled the loft on Aug 8th, police totally ignored that alert, because thay had already "searched" the loft several times and found nothing, therefore they did not even look in the loft in response to the dog's signal. Does this not oh so clearly illustrate the danger of allowing illogical human assumption to override a clear signal from an expert?

" ... on August 8 a specially trained dog also signalled towards the ceiling under the loft.
But officers decided it was not necessary to check again as it had been searched before"

[Alfred R Jones]

From another thread:Yes, thanks for that excellent article. I just want to highlight that when Buster signalled the loft on Aug 8th, police totally ignored that alert, because thay had already "searched" the loft several times and found nothing, therefore they did not even look in the loft in response to the dog's signal. Does this not oh so clearly the danger of allowing human assumption to override a clear signal from a dog?

" ... on August 8 a specially trained dog also signalled towards the ceiling under the loft.
But officers decided it was not necessary to check again as it had been searched before"

And so, deliberately ignoring what the dog said oh so clearly, police didn't bother even looking up there on the 8th, and it was the 10th when finally dthey id properly search the loft.
Does this not illustrate the huge danger of allowing assumptions by illogical human brains to override the skilled signal of an expert in scent?

Only if we allow that humans illogically assumed that because the dogs didn't alert earlier that therefore there was no body in the house. 

[Mr Gray]

From another thread:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324061/Tia-Sharp-Met-forced-apologise-family-FOUR-searches-failed-spot-body.html

Yes, thanks for that excellent article. I just want to highlight that when Buster signalled the loft on Aug 8th, police totally ignored that alert, because thay had already "searched" the loft several times and found nothing, therefore they did not even look in the loft in response to the dog's signal. Does this not oh so clearly illustrate the danger of allowing illogical human assumption to override a clear signal from an expert?

" ... on August 8 a specially trained dog also signalled towards the ceiling under the loft.
But officers decided it was not necessary to check again as it had been searched before"

So as far as the police were concerned the alert was false and therefore unreliable

[pegasus]

Only if we allow that humans illogically assumed that because the dogs didn't alert earlier that therefore there was no body in the house.

Search 1: "The first ‘brief examination’ of the house was undertaken by local officers on August 3"
Search 2: "was carried out the next day by two sergeants and two PCs".
Search 3: "In the early hours of the following morning a specialist team, comprised of a sergeant and five PCs, carried out a third search."
Search 4: "On a fourth search of the house on August 8 a specially trained dog also signalled towards the ceiling under the loft. But officers decided it was not necessary to check again as it had been searched before".
Search 5: Police finally searched loft properly on Aug 10th.

The first three searches were by humans with no mention of an EVR dog.
The fourth search was by EVR dog Buster and he alerted.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324061/Tia-Sharp-Met-forced-apologise-family-FOUR-searches-failed-spot-body.html

[Alfred R Jones]

Search 1: "The first ‘brief examination’ of the house was undertaken by local officers on August 3"
Search 2: "was carried out the next day by two sergeants and two PCs".
Search 3: "In the early hours of the following morning a specialist team, comprised of a sergeant and five PCs, carried out a third search."
Search 4: "On a fourth search of the house on August 8 a specially trained dog also signalled towards the ceiling under the loft. But officers decided it was not necessary to check again as it had been searched before".
Search 5: Police finally searched loft properly on Aug 10th.

The first three searches were by humans with no mention of an EVR dog.
The fourth search was by EVR dog Buster and he alerted.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324061/Tia-Sharp-Met-forced-apologise-family-FOUR-searches-failed-spot-body.html

Fruitless search: Despite four searches by police officers using sniffer dogs, it was not until a specialist dog was taken in, that Tia's remains were founds

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324061/Tia-Sharp-Met-forced-apologise-family-FOUR-searches-failed-spot-body.html#ixzz37eRVO7R8
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Alfred R Jones]

Are cadaver dogs reliable?

Retired Scotland Yard Commander John O'Connor is the most senior figure so far to go public with criticism of the way the case has been handled.

'The police should have gone into that house quicker. Clearly Hazell should have been treated as a suspect from the off. he was the last person to see Tia alive,' he told The Sun.

'if police have enough evidence to bring in sniffer dogs, then they have enough evidence to pull the place apart. It's unforgiveable they didn't do that.'

'You can't rely on a dog - you need human beings. They haven't done very well. That child should have been found much quicker.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2186935/Tia-Sharp-murder-Why-did-police-officers-dogs-8-days-body-missing-12-year-old.html#ixzz37eTr0BxI
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[pegasus]

Fruitless search: Despite four searches by police officers using sniffer dogs, it was not until a specialist dog was taken in, that Tia's remains were founds

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2324061/Tia-Sharp-Met-forced-apologise-family-FOUR-searches-failed-spot-body.html#ixzz37eRVO7R8
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

The first time an EVR dog was taken into the house was Aug 8th. The dog alerted towards the loft, but police did not bother looking up there again. This dog is a german shepherd with a female handler.

The idea, that an EVR dog at any time failed to alert in the Sharp house, is I think likely to be incorrect.

[Alfred R Jones]

The first time an EVR dog was taken into the house was Aug 8th. The dog alerted towards the loft, but police did not bother looking up there again. This dog is a german shepherd with a female handler.

The idea, that an EVR dog at any time failed to alert in the Sharp house, is I think likely to be incorrect.

Why were you excusing their failure to alert on the other thread then? 

[pegasus]

"You can't rely on a dog - you need human beings. They haven't done very well."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2186935/Tia-Sharp-murder-Why-did-police-officers-dogs-8-days-body-missing-12-year-old.html

That is a grossly unfair and incorrect statement.
Fact is - the first EVR dog went in on Aug 8th and alerted.
The EVR dog did very well indeed.

[pegasus]

Why were you excusing their failure to alert on the other thread then?

Since making that post that I researched and discovered that the EVR dog did alert first time.

[Alfred R Jones]

Since making that post that I researched and discovered that the EVR dog did alert first time.

Fair enough.

[pegasus]

Fair enough.

Here are the two dogs (different coats, different handlers) which I am assuming are the EVR dogs