Are Victim Detection and Forensic Evidence Search Dogs reliable?

[ferryman]

That key wasn't behind the sofa.

Neither was anything remotely connected to Madeleine.

Next?

[pathfinder73]

Neither was anything remotely connected to Madeleine.

Next?

Both dogs alerted behind the sofa so they did find what they were trained to do.

[ferryman]

Both dogs alerted behind the sofa so they did find what they were trained to do.

Some historic minuscule trace of blood, maybe.

So what?

[slartibartfast]

Are you seriously suggesting that police searching for a woman missing for four months are going to bring along anything other than a Victim Recovery Dog?

I would have thought that was a given when 'sniffer dogs' were mentioned in the article. When I read it in context I had absolutely no problem identifying what these dogs were trained to find.
Had the article been on a drugs bust and not a missing person ... I would also have been able to deduce what the dogs had been trained to find.

Even these dogs which had been used to look for the remains of victims in the Twin Towers failed to locate the scent of a decomposing bnody on this occasion ... just one instance proving that dogs are not reliable.



**Snip
Sniffer dogs who were used to locate bodies at the site of Ground Zero in New York after the 9/11 terror attack were also sent into the single storey property.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1307228/Husband-hoarder-discovers-body-piles-rubbish-messy-house-shared--months-went-missing.html#ixzz3nRyAcMSZ

So that will be a don't know then.

[G-Unit]

you have things back to front...no one has to prove the dogs wrong...that is not the way the justice system works and shows how skewed your logic is. The dogs have to be proved right..and they have not been. The alerts are not 50/50...without corroboration they have zero credibility

The justice system? Irrelevant until a case arrives in court.

The dogs wereproved right for some of the alerts, so you are wrong on that point..

The other alerts were either right or wrong. There are no other possibilities. We don't know, without evidence, whether they were right or wrong. Until such evidence is found there's an equal (50/50) chance.

[Mr Gray]

The justice system? Irrelevant until a case arrives in court.

The dogs wereproved right for some of the alerts, so you are wrong on that point..

The other alerts were either right or wrong. There are no other possibilities. We don't know, without evidence, whether they were right or wrong. Until such evidence is found there's an equal (50/50) chance.

So by your maths there is a 50/50 chance Maddie is still alive

[Mr Gray]

The justice system? Irrelevant until a case arrives in court.

The dogs wereproved right for some of the alerts, so you are wrong on that point..

The other alerts were either right or wrong. There are no other possibilities. We don't know, without evidence, whether they were right or wrong. Until such evidence is found there's an equal (50/50) chance.

We don't know what Eddie alerted to re the car
The fact that blood was found does not prove that's what he alerted to

[ferryman]

We don't know what Eddie alerted to re the car
The fact that blood was found does not prove that's what he alerted to

I would say the fact that he alerted to the key twice is quite compelling.

What possessed Grime to suppose Madeleine's blood might be found on it is another question .....

[pegasus]

We don't know what Eddie alerted to re the car
The fact that blood was found does not prove that's what he alerted to

Yes I find myself agreeing with you Dave, good point.

[Alice Purjorick]

So by your maths there is a 50/50 chance Maddie is still alive

That would depend on how you were defining "chance" in this context.

[Mr Gray]

That would depend on how you were defining "chance" in this context.

to put it simply...just because a given situation has two possibilities...neither of which can be proved... then it does not mean each possibility has an equal probability

[Alice Purjorick]

to put it simply...just because a given situation has two possibilities...neither of which can be proved... then it does not mean each possibility has an equal probability

I asked how you were defining chance. You haven't answered that question.

[Mr Gray]

I asked how you were defining chance. You haven't answered that question.

It's a stupid question

[Alice Purjorick]

It's a stupid question

Not at all. Your answer will tell me whether or not you know what you are on about.

[pegasus]

Was the DNA sample extracted from the vehicle keycard definitely a DNA sample of blood?
On the keycard could there not have been both of the following?
(A) A little dried blood from a finger cut of some previous renter of the vehicle, or rental company employee.
(B) DNA of skin/sweat of the witness (who had just driven the car from PDL to Portimao a few hours before).