Have we learnt anything from the Maddie case?

[Mr Gray]

No they had the opportunity to enlighten us and they didn't so it up to them not me.  Why are you so against a woke and wandered situation?  I can see why the PJ were for they were backing "the parents did it" theory, but what do you gain from it?

Im not against it at all....Im looking at the evidence...and the final report...with more information than we have said it was highly unlikely...that is evidence...yours is just opinion

[G-Unit]

No they had the opportunity to enlighten us and they didn't so it up to them not me.  Why are you so against a woke and wandered situation?  I can see why the PJ were for they were backing "the parents did it" theory, but what do you gain from it?

The police thought woke and wandered was unlikely because they would have expected to find her if that's what had happened imo.

[Mr Gray]

The police thought woke and wandered was unlikely because they would have expected to find her if that's what had happened imo.

thats your opinion but you have no idea on what basis the PJ made their decision...and your reason does not tie in with what the final report said

[Mr Gray]

The police thought woke and wandered was unlikely because they would have expected to find her if that's what had happened imo.

have a look at the final report to see just how wrong you are...they gave a very specific reason

[faithlilly]

Why cadaverine in particular? There are hundreds of substances that give off a whiff of decomposition.

Eddie alerts to blood and cadaver scent. Keela didn't alert which means Eddie's alert couldn't have been to blood. Cadaver scent is made up of many volatile compounds including cadaverine. Pus contains no cadaverine.

[Mr Gray]

Eddie alerts to blood and cadaver scent. Keela didn't alert which means Eddie's alert couldn't have been to blood. Cadaver scent is made up of many volatile compounds including cadaverine. Pus contains no cadaverine.

you need to remember...none of the alerts can be regarded as evidence unless corroborated.....without corroboration all you have is barking dogs.....that is an undeniable fact. My opinion is that there was never a cadaver in 5A...and no one can disprove that

[faithlilly]

you need to remember...none of the alerts can be regarded as evidence unless corroborated.....without corroboration all you have is barking dogs.....that is an undeniable fact. My opinion is that there was never a cadaver in 5A...and no one can disprove that

It's rather more complicated than that.

From Martin Grime's profile.

'It is possible however that the EVRD will locate the scent source as it would for 'dead body' scent. Forensic testing may not produce evidence but any alert may provide intelligence to support other factors in the investigation of a crime.'

[Carana]

Eddie alerts to blood and cadaver scent. Keela didn't alert which means Eddie's alert couldn't have been to blood. Cadaver scent is made up of many volatile compounds including cadaverine. Pus contains no cadaverine.

Eddie also alerts to blood, according to Grime.

I don't find it clear what exactly Grime means by "cadaver scent". Some dogs have been known to falsely alert when searchng for bodies in peat bogs - because they give off methane, and that's one of the VOCs. A whole body won't smell the same from one period to another, nor will one type of body part necessarily smell the same as a different one.

And I still don't know what Grime meant by scents he was trained to detect (as opposed to what he would specifically not react to that is also subject to decomposition recognisable by a dog).

What was he reacting to on the sex tissues in Jersey? A speck of blood or semen/vaginal secretions? Or both? Presumably the tissues didn't indicate anything of relevance to the investigation.

[Carana]

I have this bad feeling that we could be descending into yet another dog thread... not sure I could cope with that. lol

[Robittybob1]

Im not against it at all....Im looking at the evidence...and the final report...with more information than we have said it was highly unlikely...that is evidence...yours is just opinion

Well is it true that it is just your opinion that they have "more information than we have"?

[faithlilly]

Eddie also alerts to blood, according to Grime.

I don't find it clear what exactly Grime means by "cadaver scent". Some dogs have been known to falsely alert when searchng for bodies in peat bogs - because they give off methane, and that's one of the VOCs. A whole body won't smell the same from one period to another, nor will one type of body part necessarily smell the same as a different one.

And I still don't know what Grime meant by scents he was trained to detect (as opposed to what he would specifically not react to that is also subject to decomposition recognisable by a dog).

What was he reacting to on the sex tissues in Jersey? A speck of blood or semen/vaginal secretions? Or both? Presumably the tissues didn't indicate anything of relevance to the investigation.

Eddie does alert to blood as does Keela. Keela didn't alert which rules out the scent being from blood.

[Robittybob1]

The police thought woke and wandered was unlikely because they would have expected to find her if that's what had happened imo.

But any other ending is just as likely after a woke and wandered. 
Woke and wandered and then abducted.
Woke and wandered and then lost in earthworks.
Woke and wandered died in accident and then taken by parents.

[Robittybob1]

thats your opinion but you have no idea on what basis the PJ made their decision...and your reason does not tie in with what the final report said

Why are you so fixated by that final report?  Do you agree with everything in the final report?

[Mr Gray]

Why are you so fixated by that final report?  Do you agree with everything in the final report?

What a strange reply
I am not fixated with the final report
Once again do not post your opinion as fact...it isn't

I'm quoting the final report

[Robittybob1]

What a strange reply
I am not fixated with the final report
Once again do not post your opinion as fact...it isn't

I'm quoting the final report

No you are not for you were adding in your opinion about more information.  Do you agree with everything in that report?