MG has never posted his views on a public forum but educating you about his dogs is a full time job. He is an expert witness. And others using the Zapata case as example of cadaver dogs being wrong certainly backfired 
Without wishing to divert the thread, what is the requirement for someone to qualify as an expert witness in a UK court of criminal law?
I ask this for a simple reason. If I was sitting on a jury and the judge permitted Martin Grime to be classed as an expert witness, then the judge would find himself/herself short of a juror, unless considerable questions about Mr Grime's expertise, the dogs' capability, the dogs' training and testing, and the dogs' deployment in this and other cases were resolved satisfactorily.
Despite reading multiple dogs threads in multiple places, I have yet to see one that leads me to elevate Mr Grime to the status of 'expert', or to convince me to put faith in the dogs. That information may exist, but if it does so, it is not in the public domain, IMO.
I would expect to see Mr Grime undergoing an extensive grilling by any half-competent barrister. As to whether Mr Grime would pass muster or die a flame-roasted death, who knows.
