Richard Hall's film 'When Madeleine Died?' uploaded to YouTube 19th Feb

[xtina]

When there is zero evidence Madeleine is dead, why was a thread like this allowed to see light of day, let alone run to 64 pages?

there is zero evidence ..for the abduction is there .....

imagine a thread on proof that maddie was abducted ...one post  with erm.....erm.......erm,.oh ye ...the mccs said she was ...

the thread has a lot of interest ...judging by the views



something is not right ....

things are not as credable as they seem....

five photo's taken ..sat sun ...no more taken the rest of the week......

last photo shown three weeks later ...after gmcc trip to England ....

last credable sighting as family of five ..sunday....

the doubt about the weather being hot on the 3rd....

the creche records .....a lot to be desired ...on who signed what ...etc etc etc.....

the inconsistencies ...in statements ...

why ...would they be so sure it was maddie they had seen ...when eighteen month old photo was shown ...that greatly resembled ...other children in the group..




and that is just a few of the things shown

R H .....has shown ..nothing with the mccs adds up .....and he is not going to stand back like an idiot ...believing what the mccs say ...when there is so much that could prove otherwise.....thousands and thousands of others think the same ....[what ever there own reason or when it happened] ....that maddie was not abducted ....

[xtina]

Would you agree that according to M. Grime that first sentence is not true?

It seems to me that RH is under the mistaken impression that a human corpse MUST have been present in all the places Eddie and/or Keela barked.

According to M. Grime - that is not the case.

So who do you believe is correct -  RH or the dog handler himself.

stop trying to make out its..... as simple as that ,....because it isn't ...

its a question of do you believe maddie was abducted ....it may suprise you ....but i don't think she was ...

[Benice]

stop trying to make out its..... as simple as that ,....because it isn't ...

its a question of do you believe maddie was abducted ....it may suprise you ....but i don't think she was ...

On the contrary it is RH who is making out that  ''it's as simple as that'' with his very clear claim that :-

Quote

The past presence of a human corpse was detected in the McCanns’ apartment and in many other places associated with the McCanns by highly trained police sniffer dogs.
End quote.

Martin Grime has never made that claim - and in fact has given reasons why the dog alerts (without evidence to substantiate them ) should NOT be regarded as proof that a human corpse must have been present in 5A - or anywhere else - and therefore RH is grossly misleading his 'viewers' by making that false statement.

RH has obviously decided Martin Grime was wrong and he is right.
 
You may find that acceptable.    However,  in view of the already widespread mistaken belief that because Eddie alerted  'someone must have died in 5A'  -  I find such shoddy research to be reprehensible as it further promotes what is actually a myth.

AIMHO

 

[G-Unit]

Would you agree that according to M. Grime that first sentence is not true?

It seems to me that RH is under the mistaken impression that a human corpse MUST have been present in all the places Eddie and/or Keela barked.

According to M. Grime - that is not the case.

So who do you believe is correct -  RH or the dog handler himself.

Grime said Eddie only barks when he finds the scent he is trained to find.

Grime said Eddie's behaviour at G5A demonstrated immediate interest.

Grime said that interest led Eddie to the bedroom where he barked.

Finally;

Whereas there may be no retrievable evidence for court purposes this may well assist intelligence gathering in Major Crime
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm

Intelligence is what Eddie provided. Detectives begin with intelligence and work towards getting evidence. No possibility can be ruled out and that includes the possibility that there was a cadaver in the apartment. Further investigation may point towards or away from that scenario, but it will have been kept in mind.

I have seen nothing to date which 'proves' there was no cadaver there.

[xtina]

On the contrary it is RH who is making out that  ''it's as simple as that'' with his very clear claim that :-

Quote

The past presence of a human corpse was detected in the McCanns’ apartment and in many other places associated with the McCanns by highly trained police sniffer dogs.
End quote.

Martin Grime has never made that claim - and in fact has given reasons why the dog alerts (without evidence to substantiate them ) should NOT be regarded as proof that a human corpse must have been present in 5A - or anywhere else - and therefore RH is grossly misleading his 'viewers' by making that false statement.

RH has obviously decided Martin Grime was wrong and he is right.
 
You may find that acceptable.    However,  in view of the already widespread mistaken belief that because Eddie alerted  'someone must have died in 5A'  -  I find such shoddy research to be reprehensible as it further promotes what is actually a myth.

AIMHO

 RH is grossly misleading his 'viewers' by making that false statement.

well I'm sure if that is the case ....something would have been done about it by now ...but it hasn't has it

[xtina]

Grime said Eddie only barks when he finds the scent he is trained to find.

Grime said Eddie's behaviour at G5A demonstrated immediate interest.

Grime said that interest led Eddie to the bedroom where he barked.

Finally;

Whereas there may be no retrievable evidence for court purposes this may well assist intelligence gathering in Major Crime
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm

Intelligence is what Eddie provided. Detectives begin with intelligence and work towards getting evidence. No possibility can be ruled out and that includes the possibility that there was a cadaver in the apartment. Further investigation may point towards or away from that scenario, but it will have been kept in mind.

I have seen nothing to date which 'proves' there was no cadaver there.

exactly

[Benice]

Grime said Eddie only barks when he finds the scent he is trained to find.

Grime said Eddie's behaviour at G5A demonstrated immediate interest.

Grime said that interest led Eddie to the bedroom where he barked.

Finally;

Whereas there may be no retrievable evidence for court purposes this may well assist intelligence gathering in Major Crime
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm

Intelligence is what Eddie provided. Detectives begin with intelligence and work towards getting evidence. No possibility can be ruled out and that includes the possibility that there was a cadaver in the apartment. Further investigation may point towards or away from that scenario, but it will have been kept in mind.

I have seen nothing to date which 'proves' there was no cadaver there.

My post was not about the abilities of the dogs .  It was in response to RH's specific statement that the dogs detected the past presence of a human corpse in 5A,     That is a massive claim to make IMO - especially if you are talking to an audience who may not be aware of all the relevant facts/information about dog alerts.

Would you agree that those people (including RH)  who believe that because Eddie barked - the only possible explanation for that is that a dead body MUST have been in 5A at some time  - are in fact misinformed?

Either MG is right when he warns against making certain assumptions and RH's claim is not true   - or RH is right and MG has got it all wrong.   He can't have it both ways.   

 

[xtina]

My post was not about the abilities of the dogs .  It was in response to RH's specific statement that the dogs detected the past presence of a human corpse in 5A,     That is a massive claim to make IMO - especially if you are talking to an audience who may not be aware of all the relevant facts/information about dog alerts.

Would you agree that those people (including RH)  who believe that because Eddie barked - the only possible explanation for that is that a dead body MUST have been in 5A at some time  - are in fact misinformed?

Either MG is right when he warns against making certain assumptions and RH's claim is not true   - or RH is right and MG has got it all wrong.   He can't have it both ways.   

 

That is a massive claim to make IMO

so take it up with R H...he has made it ...and up till now ..no one has questioned it ...from the mcc camp have they...

 
in this case ....its a matter of who you prefere to believe .....on what you believe ...like if maddie was not abducted like thousands believe ...what did happen to her


its like we all had to believe ...J T saw abductor ....then low and behold ...after six odd years ...it turned out he wasn't ....the abductor ...something at the time that backed the mccs story ...[well the only thing].

[G-Unit]

My post was not about the abilities of the dogs .  It was in response to RH's specific statement that the dogs detected the past presence of a human corpse in 5A,     That is a massive claim to make IMO - especially if you are talking to an audience who may not be aware of all the relevant facts/information about dog alerts.

Would you agree that those people (including RH)  who believe that because Eddie barked - the only possible explanation for that is that a dead body MUST have been in 5A at some time  - are in fact misinformed?

Either MG is right when he warns against making certain assumptions and RH's claim is not true   - or RH is right and MG has got it all wrong.   He can't have it both ways.   

 

I'm sure Martin Grime believed in his dogs, that's clear from the way he described them. Nevertheless, as a police officer who deals in evidence he had to make it clear that the dog alerts didn't count as evidence in a court of law.

If other people choose to believe in the dogs that's their choice. RH may be misleading people, but he's not the first and he won't be the last to do that in this case.

The McCann's friends and relatives were the first to mislead people by telling the media that the apartment had been broken into. Someone mislead The Lancet by telling them that Madeleine had a coloboma. Clarence Mitchell mislead people when he said it wasn't true that Gerry McCann received lots of text messages the day before his daughter disappeared.

[Benice]

That is a massive claim to make IMO

so take it up with R H...he has made it ...and up till now ..no one has questioned it ...from the mcc camp have they...

 
in this case ....its a matter of who you prefere to believe .....on what you believe ...like if maddie was not abducted like thousands believe ...what did happen to her


its like we all had to believe ...J T saw abductor ....then low and behold ...after six odd years ...it turned out he wasn't ....the abductor ...something at the time that backed the mccs story ...[well the only thing].

As you are the person promoting RH's video - why don't you take it up with him?   Personally I would not be happy to find out that I was promoting a video to the public which includes 'misinformation' about the case.

Can I take it that you believe that because the dogs alerted -  a dead body must once have lain in 5A?    A simple yes or no will do.

If you have read the relevant files you must know that his blatent statement claiming that the dogs detected the past presence of a human corpse is not true.    If you haven't read those files then maybe you should -  as all the wishful thinking in the world won't alter that fact.

[xtina]

As you are the person promoting RH's video - why don't you take it up with him?   Personally I would not be happy to find out that I was promoting a video to the public which includes 'misinformation' about the case.

Can I take it that you believe that because the dogs alerted -  a dead body must once have lain in 5A?    A simple yes or no will do.

If you have read the relevant files you must know that his blatent statement claiming that the dogs detected the past presence of a human corpse is not true.    If you haven't read those files then maybe you should -  as all the wishful thinking in the world won't alter that fact.

what i believe is my choice ....i certainly don't have to narrow it down to a yes or no to you ...

as for promoting R H .....he does a good job of that himself ...this is only a forum ...after all 

[Jean-Pierre]

what i believe is my choice ....i certainly don't have to narrow it down to a yes or no to you ...

as for promoting R H .....he does a good job of that himself ...this is only a forum ...after all 

In fairness RH may not be aware that Eddie alerts to blood as well, and may therefore be a bit confused.  Having watched his four videos my impression is that research and attention to detail are not his strong suit.

[Brietta]

My post was not about the abilities of the dogs .  It was in response to RH's specific statement that the dogs detected the past presence of a human corpse in 5A,     That is a massive claim to make IMO - especially if you are talking to an audience who may not be aware of all the relevant facts/information about dog alerts.

Would you agree that those people (including RH)  who believe that because Eddie barked - the only possible explanation for that is that a dead body MUST have been in 5A at some time  - are in fact misinformed?

Either MG is right when he warns against making certain assumptions and RH's claim is not true   - or RH is right and MG has got it all wrong.   He can't have it both ways.   

 

After his 'success' in Praia da Luz Eddie also barked in Haute de la Garenne.

Exclusive footage of 'Eddie'- Cadaver Dog at Haut de la Garenne

One of the main factors in determining the evidential value of the alerts from an individual animal is the training record and the field record.

There was nothing found to explain what caused Eddie to bark in Portugal.
There was nothing found to explain what caused Eddie to bark in Jersey ... despite, in this case, extensive excavation work carried out.

Therefore Richard Hall is expressing only his belief that Eddie barked at a component of cadaver scent which must have been Madeleine McCann's.  It is a belief which is not backed up by any evidence.

Therefore it was wrong of him to include it as fact in his video to point an accusing finger at anyone let alone the parents of the missing child.

I am convinced the Jersey fiasco following on immediately after the visit to Luz illustrates nothing more than Eddie was well past his sell by date in this line of work.

[Benice]

I'm sure Martin Grime believed in his dogs, that's clear from the way he described them. Nevertheless, as a police officer who deals in evidence he had to make it clear that the dog alerts didn't count as evidence in a court of law.

If other people choose to believe in the dogs that's their choice. RH may be misleading people, but he's not the first and he won't be the last to do that in this case.

The McCann's friends and relatives were the first to mislead people by telling the media that the apartment had been broken into. Someone mislead The Lancet by telling them that Madeleine had a coloboma. Clarence Mitchell mislead people when he said it wasn't true that Gerry McCann received lots of text messages the day before his daughter disappeared.

This thread is about the contents of Richard Hall's video - which is being heralded  and promoted  by some as a really well researched piece of work by the author.   That obviously isn't the case as made apparent from the start by his lack of understanding of the dog alerts.

How many times do we see posts all over the place claiming that 'someone died in 5A'

His claim that the dogs detected the past presence of a human corpse is false and perpetuates that myth.

Your excuse that other people have made 'misleading' statements is not relevant to this thread IMO.

[stephen25000]

After his 'success' in Praia da Luz Eddie also barked in Haute de la Garenne.

Exclusive footage of 'Eddie'- Cadaver Dog at Haut de la Garenne

One of the main factors in determining the evidential value of the alerts from an individual animal is the training record and the field record.

There was nothing found to explain what caused Eddie to bark in Portugal.
There was nothing found to explain what caused Eddie to bark in Jersey ... despite, in this case, extensive excavation work carried out.

Therefore Richard Hall is expressing only his belief that Eddie barked at a component of cadaver scent which must have been Madeleine McCann's.  It is a belief which is not backed up by any evidence.

Therefore it was wrong of him to include it as fact in his video to point an accusing finger at anyone let alone the parents of the missing child.

I am convinced the Jersey fiasco following on immediately after the visit to Luz illustrates nothing more than Eddie was well past his sell by date in this line of work.

In your opinion as regards the last paragraph.