Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence

[Eleanor]

No matter what is actually written it has to be read and that requires thought and understanding.  You are technically correct but I don't see the difference.  How are the two views different?
And besides it is only Grime's opinion.  He needed corroborating evidence before he would say it was a fact.

And therein lies the rub.

[Mr Gray]

No matter what is actually written it has to be read and that requires thought and understanding.  You are technically correct but I don't see the difference.  How are the two views different?
And besides it is only Grime's opinion.  He needed corroborating evidence before he would say it was a fact.

so you cannot see the difference between

...it is my opinion that the dog alerted to cadaver...and,...

it is my opinion that it is possible that the dog alerted to cadaver...if you cannot see the massive difference its pointless me trying to explain

[faithlilly]

We can be quite sure that SY understand what precisely regarding the dog alerts in this case?  Perhaps you could clarify, thanks.

The weight of those alerts as evidence.

[Robittybob1]

so you cannot see the difference between

...it is my opinion that the dog alerted to cadaver...and,...

it is my opinion that it is possible that the dog alerted to cadaver...if you cannot see the massive difference its pointless me trying to explain

Opinions aren't facts.  Opinions are possibilities. 

[Robittybob1]

The weight of those alerts as evidence.

Which weighs heavier a ton of feathers or a ton of lead?

[Mr Gray]

Opinions aren't facts.  Opinions are possibilities.

You have totally missed the point... I'm talking facts... What was actually  said

[Mr Gray]

The weight of those alerts as evidence.

..
No value as evidence

[misty]

The weight of those alerts as evidence.

If the alerts by Eddie were only "suggestive of" or "possibly" cadaver odour, what other odour could Eddie have been alerting to if the dog was never wrong?

[Robittybob1]

You have totally missed the point... I'm talking facts... What was actually  said

You might have quoted Grime more correctly but can you explain what it was he meant?  Have a go at answering Misty's question.

[Alice Purjorick]

You have totally missed the point... I'm talking facts... What was actually  said

Is that what you think Mr Grime might have said in his verbal report of which there is no record [apparently] prior to it being translated into Portuguese for the police files or the version of what you think Mr Grime might have said in his verbal report of which there is no record [apparently] after it was translated into Portuguese for the police files then back into English by a translator of unknown provenance and ability which is on the files that are bandied about  or the written version of the report Mr Grime subsequently submitted which is on the files that are bandied about ?
If you see what I mean ?
Plenty of ground to cover there

[Mr Gray]

Is that what you think Mr Grime might have said in his verbal report of which there is no record [apparently] prior to it being translated into Portuguese for the police files or the version of what you think Mr Grime might have said in his verbal report of which there is no record [apparently] after it was translated into Portuguese for the police files then back into English by a translator of unknown provenance and ability which is on the files that are bandied about  or the written version of the report Mr Grime subsequently submitted which is on the files that are bandied about ?
If you see what I mean ?
Plenty of ground to cover there

Its gunit who has quoted gime incorrectly...perhaps all the files are innaccurate and its a total dogs dinner...could be

what of course really matters is the mccanns ...according to both investiagtions are not suspects

[Mr Gray]

You might have quoted Grime more correctly but can you explain what it was he meant?  Have a go at answering Misty's question.

I would rather stick to facts...and i have quoted grime correctly whereas gunit quoted incorectly..any speculation I make would most probably be removed

[misty]

You might have quoted Grime more correctly but can you explain what it was he meant?  Have a go at answering Misty's question.

By using the words "suggestive of" & "possibly" Grime was inferring that Eddie's alerts may not have been to cadaver odour, meaning the dog was not always correct and thus unreliable as a definitive source of intelligence. IMO.

[Robittybob1]

By using the words "suggestive of" & "possibly" Grime was inferring that Eddie's alerts may not have been to cadaver odour, meaning the dog was not always correct and thus unreliable as a definitive source of intelligence. IMO.

That is one way of looking at it.  I was interested to see how Davel interpreted those words?

[slartibartfast]

By using the words "suggestive of" & "possibly" Grime was inferring that Eddie's alerts may not have been to cadaver odour, meaning the dog was not always correct and thus unreliable as a definitive source of intelligence. IMO.

I take it as more of a standard police evidence approach. Unless they can be 100% certain they will qualify their statements. It doesn’t mean the dog was not always correct.