Is there any hard evidence whatsoever in the Madeleine McCann case?

[Brietta]

Exactly. The PJ didn't ignore the alerts, they asked the dog handlers to take the next step and examine inside the apartments. The delay would be because of reporting up the chain of command and getting further instructions and because the dogs didn't indicate that Madeleine's scent was present. Hindsight is a wonderful thing but investigations are a process, done step by step. There is no evidence to suggest that 5J was significant even now.

Let's get this in perspective.  A child is missing.  Dogs being used in the search for her show a great deal of interest outside the door of a vacant apartment which overlooks the place from which she was taken.  Officers are not directed by their chain of command to effect immediate entry.

Sounds entirely logical when one considers the way in which senior command conducted almost every other diligence connected with Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

[G-Unit]

Let's get this in perspective.  A child is missing.  Dogs being used in the search for her show a great deal of interest outside the door of a vacant apartment which overlooks the place from which she was taken.  Officers are not directed by their chain of command to effect immediate entry.

Sounds entirely logical when one considers the way in which senior command conducted almost every other diligence connected with Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

The dogs gave no indication that they had found the scent they were looking for. Had they done so I'm sure the police would have reacted immediately.

[Brietta]

The dogs gave no indication that they had found the scent they were looking for. Had they done so I'm sure the police would have reacted immediately.

Your opinion on the scent followed by the dogs is not substantiated by the details in the handler's report


**snip
After Rex was given the girl's clothing to sniff, he began to search on the ground floor of block 5 and when he passed the door of apartment 5 A (the place the girl had disappeared from) according to his handler, officer Fernandes, the dog altered its behaviour, sniffing with greater intensity than he had done before.
Apartment 5J of the same block was also checked as the dog had been more agitated than before as if there were a very strong strange odour there.

It was stated that this apartment had been unoccupied for some time.

Afterwards, the same kind of search was carried out using the dog Zarus which in general terms showed the same behaviour in the same places as Rex had done.

It was only when all the searches of the apartments in blocks 4 and 5 were complete, that the behaviour described above was registered.

It is certain that this kind of work does not correspond to the area that these dogs were trained in, but given that these types of dogs manage to discriminate a specific odour from others, although it could be a remote possibility that they related the odour of the missing girl with a possible location where she could have been.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm

All the apartments were searched by the dogs and when they arrived at apartment 5 J they began to sniff with intensity at the entrance door. During this behaviour it was noted by the PJ officers that there must be some unusual odour, but which with all certainty did not have anything to do with the odour being searched for, but there must have been something strange inside.

After entering the apartment, it was observed that the dour came from close to the fridge, which was open and contained some rotting meat and vegetables.

During the searches carried out in the apartments no sign of the girl was found by the dogs.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm



The dogs showed an interest outside the door of 5J on the 7th May with both dogs independently reacting outside 5A and nowhere else, apart from perhaps a tray.

No search of 5J took place until the 10th of May when entry was made seven days after Madeleine's disappearance, with a visual search ~ no forensic examination ~ determining there was no trace of Madeleine there.

The evidence provided by the dogs' interest was ignored and the area indicated by them ignored also.  What other potential evidence was discarded in like manner? 

[pathfinder73]

Independent Witnesses

I am police Inspector McGarvey of the Leicestershire police force, currently based in the criminal unit.

In relation to the above I would like to mention that at approximately 20.00 on the 5th May, I arrived at the McCann apartment with other family communications officers. We were asked several times during this meeting about questions that Gerald and Kate would like to have followed up and responded to by the PJ.

I remember that during the meetings, Kate revealed that Madeleine had spoken with her in the morning of her disappearance and said that she remembered the twins had cried during the night and that she wanted to know why neither her mother or father had appeared. Kate asked herself whether this fact could have any relation with Madeleine's disappearance.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JIM_McGARVEY.htm

I would like to add the following: At about 20.00 on Saturday 5th May 2007, I arrived at the apartment where Kate and Gerry were staying, with other officers. During the meeting Gerald and Kate had a number of questions to which they wanted follow up and responses from the PJ.

One of these questions was that they wanted the PJ to be aware of was Madeleine's revelation about Wednesday night, when she said that she was left alone during the night. She told Kate and Gerry that she remembered the twins crying and that she wanted to know why neither her mother nor her father had gone to the room to see what was happening.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN_MARKLEY.htm

[pegasus]

Re crying. There is a bit of hard evidence which the investigation did not obtain, but possibly SIO HM could do so now. Get Portugal Telecom records for the late evenings of 1st May and 2nd May, to determine on which of those two dates the late evening call to EG was. This will decide for certain which late evening crying was.

[G-Unit]

Your opinion on the scent followed by the dogs is not substantiated by the details in the handler's report


**snip
After Rex was given the girl's clothing to sniff, he began to search on the ground floor of block 5 and when he passed the door of apartment 5 A (the place the girl had disappeared from) according to his handler, officer Fernandes, the dog altered its behaviour, sniffing with greater intensity than he had done before.
Apartment 5J of the same block was also checked as the dog had been more agitated than before as if there were a very strong strange odour there.

It was stated that this apartment had been unoccupied for some time.

Afterwards, the same kind of search was carried out using the dog Zarus which in general terms showed the same behaviour in the same places as Rex had done.

It was only when all the searches of the apartments in blocks 4 and 5 were complete, that the behaviour described above was registered.

It is certain that this kind of work does not correspond to the area that these dogs were trained in, but given that these types of dogs manage to discriminate a specific odour from others, although it could be a remote possibility that they related the odour of the missing girl with a possible location where she could have been.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm

All the apartments were searched by the dogs and when they arrived at apartment 5 J they began to sniff with intensity at the entrance door. During this behaviour it was noted by the PJ officers that there must be some unusual odour, but which with all certainty did not have anything to do with the odour being searched for, but there must have been something strange inside.

After entering the apartment, it was observed that the dour came from close to the fridge, which was open and contained some rotting meat and vegetables.

During the searches carried out in the apartments no sign of the girl was found by the dogs.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm



The dogs showed an interest outside the door of 5J on the 7th May with both dogs independently reacting outside 5A and nowhere else, apart from perhaps a tray.

No search of 5J took place until the 10th of May when entry was made seven days after Madeleine's disappearance, with a visual search ~ no forensic examination ~ determining there was no trace of Madeleine there.

The evidence provided by the dogs' interest was ignored and the area indicated by them ignored also.  What other potential evidence was discarded in like manner?

 The signalling of the dog may only signify that they are confirming an intense odour in a zone. On the other hand, given the interest of the dog(s) in some of the apartment doorways, this could signify nothing, but could also very well mean that the dog has caught the odour. The dog did not demonstrate to its owner that it had found the scent it was searching for.
Witness Statement of Antonio Freitas Silva, 09 May 2007

[Brietta]

The signalling of the dog may only signify that they are confirming an intense odour in a zone. On the other hand, given the interest of the dog(s) in some of the apartment doorways, this could signify nothing, but could also very well mean that the dog has caught the odour. The dog did not demonstrate to its owner that it had found the scent it was searching for.
Witness Statement of Antonio Freitas Silva, 09 May 2007

At risk of stating the obvious ... if dogs are brought in to assist in a search and they independently display interest in one place associated with the known subject of the search and display exactly the same behaviour in one other place where the subject had no locus ... is it inappropriate or appropriate to immediately investigate that place?

What exactly was the purpose of bringing the dogs in if their behaviour was to be disregarded?

[mercury]

At risk of stating the obvious ... if dogs are brought in to assist in a search and they independently display interest in one place associated with the known subject of the search and display exactly the same behaviour in one other place where the subject had no locus ... is it inappropriate or appropriate to immediately investigate that place?

What exactly was the purpose of bringing the dogs in if their behaviour was to be disregarded?

Could ask the same question around the cadaver and blood dog

[misty]

Could ask the same question around the cadaver and blood dog

Did the PJ or Grime disregard any aspect of the behaviour & alerts by Eddie & Keela?

[mercury]

Did the PJ or Grime disregard any aspect of the behaviour & alerts by Eddie & Keela?

I was referring to the naysayers of Eddie and Keelas findings.

As regards the scent dog being interested in 5j, as it had rotting food in it, that's what some dogs do, but Eddie and Keela from what I have read were trained to disregard this kind of thing, can you say the same for live human scent search dogs?

[Brietta]

I was referring to the naysayers of Eddie and Keelas findings.

As regards the scent dog being interested in 5j, as it had rotting food in it, that's what some dogs do, but Eddie and Keela from what I have read were trained to disregard this kind of thing, can you say the same for live human scent search dogs?

Yeah ... and that will be why we all saw Eddie running around a kitchen holding a juicy morsel he had retrieved from a waste bin while he was supposed to be 'working'.
So I suppose that could be classed as evidence that Eddie may not bother with road kill ... but a juicy kebab might just be too much competition for his trained response.

[misty]

I was referring to the naysayers of Eddie and Keelas findings.

As regards the scent dog being interested in 5j, as it had rotting food in it, that's what some dogs do, but Eddie and Keela from what I have read were trained to disregard this kind of thing, can you say the same for live human scent search dogs?

Each & every alert by Eddie & Keela was addressed. As these dogs were not taken to 5J we do not know what they may have alerted to, rotten meat or otherwise.
Live human scent dogs also do what they are trained to do but there are various limitations, depending on their training. Tracking children under 10 requires specialist training. The S&R dogs did show an interest in 5J but it wasn't treated as a priority.
 Similarly, the scent outside the apartments was followed, then lost, outside Block 6. Why weren't the dogs taken into Block 6, if only to rule out the presence of any further scent?

[mercury]

Yeah ... and that will be why we all saw Eddie running around a kitchen holding a juicy morsel he had retrieved from a waste bin while he was supposed to be 'working'.
So I suppose that could be classed as evidence that Eddie may not bother with road kill ... but a juicy kebab might just be too much competition for his trained response.

Did anyone see Eddie running around  a kitchen holding a juicy morsel in his mouth? I must have missed it.

I WILL need a video confirmation or any other for this to take you seriously Brietta, thanks in advance.

[mercury]

Each & every alert by Eddie & Keela was addressed. As these dogs were not taken to 5J we do not know what they may have alerted to, rotten meat or otherwise.
Live human scent dogs also do what they are trained to do but there are various limitations, depending on their training. Tracking children under 10 requires specialist training. The S&R dogs did show an interest in 5J but it wasn't treated as a priority.
 Similarly, the scent outside the apartments was followed, then lost, outside Block 6. Why weren't the dogs taken into Block 6, if only to rule out the presence of any further scent?

I only asked if person scent dogs were trained to ignore other smells....as Eddie and Keela were trained, as to what was smelt in block 5 and 6 by them sorry, I'm not au fair with all those details

[G-Unit]

At risk of stating the obvious ... if dogs are brought in to assist in a search and they independently display interest in one place associated with the known subject of the search and display exactly the same behaviour in one other place where the subject had no locus ... is it inappropriate or appropriate to immediately investigate that place?

What exactly was the purpose of bringing the dogs in if their behaviour was to be disregarded?

As i understand it there was a lot of sniffing but no alerting. It doesn't explain how these dogs alerted. I expect sniffing equals exploring the different scents present to see if the one they are looking for is one of them. Strange, considering that they should have alerted to 5A and possibly 5H, as Madeleine had been in those apartments.