Was the video footage of the dog inspections 'doctored'?

[Eleanor]

I don't understand the underlined bit. How do you know that the PJ didn't "remove" elements?

In reality, working from rushes, the opposite would be true. You go through rushes (with the inevitable dangling camera pointing uselessely at the floor or capturing chitchat at some point) and decide what you want to include in the montage.

Either Levy had access to the rushes and proceeded to do the dog videos or the PJ did.

It makes far more sense to me that the PJ did and Levy just got hold of the edited versions and posted them.

Why don't we just face it.  Levy set out to alter the face of the investigation.  I have no idea as for why.

I don't have problem with this since we now all know what he and his sidekick were trying to do.  And it never mattered anyway.

PS.  Have I gone Off Topic yet again?

[Carana]

The video footage of the dogs has been edited certainly for public consumption with bits having been cut out where the dogs have not been as helpful to investigators as they might have wanted.  The term 'doctoring' engenders all sorts of thoughts of conspiracies and is probably the wrong term to use.

I agree with you on that. I don't think what appears in the clips was "faked", but what does appear doesn't show the entire story.

You can look at it in two ways: editing OUT or editing IN.

Editing OUT: you deliberately exclude certain scenes from the rushes.

Editing IN: you go through the rushes and select the sequences you want to show.

I tend to go with the editing IN as it's easier and far faster to scan through useless footage to find the relevant bits.

Someone, however, chose to exclude potentially relevant material in what was uploaded.

[Carana]

Why don't we just face it.  Levy set out to alter the face of the investigation.  I have no idea as for why.

I don't have problem with this since we now all know what he and his sidekick were trying to do.  And it never mattered anyway.

PS.  Have I gone Off Topic yet again?

For once, I think that we are on topic. LOL.

The real issue is why certain sequences in the Cuddle Cat episode didn't appear on those clips.

I also wonder what else may have been selectively left out.

There are no clips of the other searches with negative results, nor is there any comment.

On the one hand, I can understand that negative search results wouldn't be of interest for a potential prosecution, but, on the other hand, what actually happened over those days?

I really do hope that Dias watched all of the raw footage.

[ferryman]

I agree with you on that. I don't think what appears in the clips was "faked", but what does appear doesn't show the entire story.

You can look at it in two ways: editing OUT or editing IN.

Editing OUT: you deliberately exclude certain scenes from the rushes.

Editing IN: you go through the rushes and select the sequences you want to show.

I tend to go with the editing IN as it's easier and far faster to scan through useless footage to find the relevant bits.

Someone, however, chose to exclude potentially relevant material in what was uploaded.

I guess it depends how you define "doctoring".

For me, the definition would be attempting to create a misleading or false impression.

Anything that attempts that I would count as doctoring 

[stephen25000]

Thank you, Stephen.  Believe it, or not, your opinion is welcomed.  Certainly, at least by me.  And I don't think that anyone on this Forum would gainsay that.

Well I've seen the 'edited' video.

Is there a direct link to the unedited version ?

It would also be interesting to see a  a few other videos of dog handling, be it from Martin Grime or other sources. This would form a frame of reference to make a fair judgement.

[Carana]

Well I've seen the 'edited' video.

Is there a direct link to the unedited version ?

It would also be interesting to see a  a few other videos of dog handling, be it from Martin Grime or other sources. This would form a frame of reference to make a fair judgement.

Which one?

[stephen25000]

Which one?

The one on page two of this thread.

[Eleanor]

Well I've seen the 'edited' video.

Is there a direct link to the unedited version ?

It would also be interesting to see a  a few other videos of dog handling, be it from Martin Grime or other sources. This would form a frame of reference to make a fair judgement.

Sorry,Stephen, I can't help.  As you know, I am not good with links.  But I expect that someone else can.

[stephen25000]

Sorry,Stephen, I can't help.  As you know, I am not good with links.  But I expect that someone else can.

Thanks for the reply Eleanor.

[ferryman]

Sorry,Stephen, I can't help.  As you know, I am not good with links.  But I expect that someone else can.

There is no link in the public domain to the unedited versions.

Nigel Moore has exempted the corrupted videos from being pulled by anyone except the McCanns themselves by uploading the corrupted version onto a domain he owns, and which therefore cannot be pulled.

The McCanns themselves could theoretically challenge it, but I suspect they are preoccupied with other matters just at the moment ...

[Eleanor]

Thanks for the reply Eleanor.

Je vous en prie.

[Carana]

Well I've seen the 'edited' video.

Is there a direct link to the unedited version ?

It would also be interesting to see a  a few other videos of dog handling, be it from Martin Grime or other sources. This would form a frame of reference to make a fair judgement.

The villa one (from your later reply to me)?

I can't think offhand of other cases in which dog searches have been uploaded to the Internet aside from some Jersey footage involving the same handler/dog and the odd generic sniff around by other dogs to accompany news bulletins in other cases.

[Brietta]

The one on page two of this thread.

I think this may be from the same video. The link shows some footage of the search of the apartments where Eddie did not alert.

Madeleine McCann – Eddie and Keela Cadaver Dogs  
http://wn.com/madeleine_mccann__sniffer_dogs_eddie_and_keela?orderby=rating

I found the following points of interest.
All times are approximate.

12:09 – a short sequence is repeated; it is not significant apart from showing some sort of interference after filming.

35:16 – Keela seen in cupboard checking and showing great interest in a corner, physically moving a box out of the way: this sequence is cut short.

39:30 – Eddie shows great interest in an area close to a sideboard – he is called away – reminiscent of what happened in the garage. Dialogue indicates that his interest has been noted and the sideboard pulled out to give him access.

43:32 – Eddie showed great interest underbeds

46:09 – culminating in Martin Grime indicating to “check in there under that bed.”

On camera MG then said that the only interest Eddie had shown in that apartment was to food he had found in the bin (looked like a kebab 39:50appx) … but that is not what I saw … he was interested in under the beds and at the sideboard.

He did not give his trained response as in 5a, but was he given the time?

[Alfred R Jones]

I'm fairly certain that in the early days after the video was released you could view the dog throwing cuddlecat up in the air.  Then, after it became apparent from online discussions in forums about how questionable this appeared to be, the videos were removed and then returned to the public domain with bits missing. 

[Eleanor]

I'm fairly certain that in the early days after the video was released you could view the dog throwing cuddlecat up in the air.  Then, after it became apparent from online discussions in forums about how questionable this appeared to be, the videos were removed and then returned to the public domain with bits missing.

Ah, well.  That's it then.. So Sadie isn't always wrong.