Were the dog alerts in any way significant?

[G-Unit]

You seem to be in a bit of a fix now. Can no-one explain why these dogs don't alert like mad all the time then? After all, as you say, there's blood and bits of people everywhere!   

[OxfordBloo]

You seem to be in a bit of a fix now. Can no-one explain why these dogs don't alert like mad all the time then? After all, as you say, there's blood and bits of people everywhere!   

If anyone is in a fix, it is dog worshipers.

Grime made the claim that they react to the smallest stimulus. He needs to explain why they didn't alert elsewhere.

I know what I think, but it would not be popular with dog worshipers.

[G-Unit]

If anyone is in a fix, it is dog worshipers.

Grime made the claim that they react to the smallest stimulus. He needs to explain why they didn't alert elsewhere.

I know what I think, but it would not be popular with dog worshipers.

No, it's those who think they know all about the dogs used by many agencies to help them do their jobs.

[OxfordBloo]

No, it's those who think they know all about the dogs used by many agencies to help them do their jobs.

I disagree

Grime insists that they can identify the minutest traces of blood, yet has not explained why they do not alert everywhere, only where he directs them.

[Carew]

I disagree

Grime insists that they can identify the minutest traces of blood, yet has not explained why they do not alert everywhere, only where he directs them.

He " directed" Eddie to and around a bathroom and other areas............no alert.

[Carana]

No. Cadaver means dead body.

Eddie does however react to body parts that have been amputated. Although whole bodies have a much more aggressive putrefaction rate because of the bowel flora.

I think it would have been clearer if the term "human decomposition" had been used.

Of course the scent of a whole decomposing body would be different to a specific type of decaying body substance. And the dominant VOCs change over time.

Grime's comment on the CuddleCat episode (and even the PJ DCCB found that sequence bewildering) was:

The only alert indication given was when the dog located a pink cuddly toy in
the villas lounge. The CSI dog did not alert to the toy when screened
separately.

It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to cadaver scent
contamination. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this
alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.

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

I have no problems with the use of dogs as an asset to help humans find evidence. In this case, no corroborating evidence was found.

Yes, Lowe found sufficient DNA of a cop on a tile, and sufficient DNA on a key fob that was quite likely to be Gerry's. There is no corroboration that that DNA was blood. The only indication that it may have been was due to Keela's alert as that is all she was trained to detect.

[OxfordBloo]

He " directed" Eddie to and around a bathroom and other areas............no alert.

So...

[jassi]

I really don't care one way or the other about the dogs, but SY must have faith in them otherwise they wouldn't had gone to the expense of taking them over to Portugal last summer.

[OxfordBloo]

I really don't care one way or the other about the dogs, but SY must have faith in them otherwise they wouldn't had gone to the expense of taking them over to Portugal last summer.

They are useful as indicators. But not as evidence providers.

[Carana]

He " directed" Eddie to and around a bathroom and other areas............no alert.

This would only be an issue in a criminal trial, but I'm still curious as to whether Grime was aware of Amaral's theory prior to the searches.

I'd find it quite extraordinary if Grime wasn't aware that the child disappeared from 5A. I'd also find it odd if he hadn't realised who the only Renault Scenic plastered with Missing Madeleine posters belonged to.

[Carew]

So...

"only where he directs" was what you stated...........Did he "direct" to a boy`s t shirt from some sort of expectation?

.........and how would the dog decide in which area of a room or site the handler`s "directing" should lead to an alert?

[OxfordBloo]

"only where he directs" was what you stated...........Did he "direct" to a boy`s t shirt from some sort of expectation?

.........and how would the dog decide in which area of a room or site the handler`s "directing" should lead to an alert?

I didn't say always where he directs them, only that be has some control over whether or not they do alert. They ma not sleet where he does not encourage him, but are more likely to alert where he is obviously interested.

[G-Unit]

I didn't say always where he directs them, only that be has some control over whether or not they do alert. They ma not sleet where he does not encourage him, but are more likely to alert where he is obviously interested.

Please explain how it would be in any handler's interests to direct his dog's alerts? If that happened regularly and no evidence was found he would soon find himself out of a job.

[Mr Gray]

No, it's those who think they know all about the dogs used by many agencies to help them do their jobs.

every agency that use dog's use them to find evidence...that's there job and that's what makes them so valuable...an alert with no evidence is useless

[Alfred R Jones]

Please explain how it would be in any handler's interests to direct his dog's alerts? If that happened regularly and no evidence was found he would soon find himself out of a job.

Do you accept that Eddie alerts to minute traces of blood, even months after they have been spilt?  Do you accept that it is highly unlikely that no blood was ever spilt in any of the places Eddie was directed to, apart from on McCann property?