Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence

[misty]

As this thread is about evidence perhaps you could provide some rather than basing your opinion on what seems reasonable and logical to you.

Is it your opinion that the examination of the alleged crime scene, carried out by the dogs was forensically acceptable? Would you (or a court) have considered any tangible evidence collected by humans using the same method as the dogs to be reliable?

[Vertigo Swirl]

As this thread is about evidence perhaps you could provide some rather than basing your opinion on what seems reasonable and logical to you.

Some evidence of what exactly (apart from my own IMO reasonable and logical conclusions)?

[Alice Purjorick]

Were that rule of yours to be observed across the board ... the potential for a benign and happy social media scene would be immense ... as very few would be able to meet the criteria.  Possibly not even you ;)

I appear to have misread the sign on the door then.
The actions are far from benign; abuse, aggression and condescension seemingly being the order of the day. I was just following suit.
I'll go look for the benign happy room.

[G-Unit]

The issue raised by Vertigo Swirl could be raised against the evidence of the dogs by the defence team.  If raised it could cast an element of doubt on their findings.

They could ask the question of Grime and he would answer. It would then be up to the Judge/jury to decide if his answer was satisfactory.

[Mr Gray]

They could ask the question of Grime and he would answer. It would then be up to the Judge/jury to decide if his answer was satisfactory.

Grime has already given his opinion  re the alerts...as has Harrison...no evidential relaibility...are you sugggesting he might change it

[G-Unit]

Some evidence of what exactly (apart from my own reasonable and logical conclusions)?

In the absence of evidence to support our claims we are required to include an imo, I am told.

[G-Unit]

Grime has already given his opinion  re the alerts...as has Harrison...no evidential relaibility...are you sugggesting he might change it

It wasn't his opinion of the alerts that was being discussed, it was a layman's opinion of his training methods. 

[Mr Gray]

It wasn't his opinion of the alerts that was being discussed, it was a layman's opinion of his training methods.

but how can the alerts even be considered as evidence if Grime and Harrison say they have no evidential reliability

[misty]

Does anyone know who in the SYP conducted the regular testing of Eddie?

[Vertigo Swirl]

In the absence of evidence to support our claims we are required to include an imo, I am told.

I think you will find that if you review what I wrote carefully, I made no unsubstantiated claims, merely posed a couple of questions and was only seeking your opinion - I take your unnecessary request for evidence as an attempt at deflection.

Here's what I wrote again:

Does it not stand to reason that a dog trained to look for evidence in a crime scene should also be trained not to pick up (and contaminate) potential evidence in his mouth?  Say Eddie had previously been rootling around some old cadaver, and then snuffled his way around a crime scene looking for evidence.  Any risk of cross contamination there, in your opinion?

You can of course answer: no it does not stand to reason that a dog should be trained not to contaminate a crime scene, and no risk of cross-contamination from the dog, and that will be the end of it.

[Robittybob1]

I think you will find that if you review what I wrote carefully, I made no unsubstantiated claims, merely posed a couple of questions and was only seeking your opinion - I take your unnecessary request for evidence as an attempt at deflection.

Here's what I wrote again:

Does it not stand to reason that a dog trained to look for evidence in a crime scene should also be trained not to pick up (and contaminate) potential evidence in his mouth?  Say Eddie had previously been rootling around some old cadaver, and then snuffled his way around a crime scene looking for evidence.  Any risk of cross contamination there, in your opinion?

You can of course answer: no it does not stand to reason that a dog should be trained not to contaminate a crime scene, and no risk of cross-contamination from the dog, and that will be the end of it.

I doubt that a simple denial will resolve anything?

[Alice Purjorick]

I think you will find that if you review what I wrote carefully, I made no unsubstantiated claims, merely posed a couple of questions and was only seeking your opinion - I take your unnecessary request for evidence as an attempt at deflection.

Here's what I wrote again:

Does it not stand to reason that a dog trained to look for evidence in a crime scene should also be trained not to pick up (and contaminate) potential evidence in his mouth?  Say Eddie had previously been rootling around some old cadaver, and then snuffled his way around a crime scene looking for evidence.  Any risk of cross contamination there, in your opinion?

You can of course answer: no it does not stand to reason that a dog should be trained not to contaminate a crime scene, and no risk of cross-contamination from the dog, and that will be the end of it.

OK then Ace you tell us how it should be done or does your ability extend merely as far as "only asking questions" ? Which if you will pardon my bluntness adds nothing to debate.

[slartibartfast]

Does it not stand to reason that a dog trained to look for evidence in a crime scene should also be trained not to pick up (and contaminate) potential evidence in his mouth?  Say Eddie had previously been rootling around some old cadaver, and then snuffled his way around a crime scene looking for evidence.  Any risk of cross contamination there, in your opinion?

I would expect a dog of this type would not be trained to high levels of obedience which may lead to it being too focused on the handler and less on the task in hand.

[faithlilly]

You mean you haven't seen  them before... 2 min

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANALYSIS-11-VOLUMES.htm

Of course I have. I was more interested in Grime’s answers.

[G-Unit]

Does anyone know who in the SYP conducted the regular testing of Eddie?

It was ACPO which assessed, tested and licensed Eddie.

U.K., A.C.P.O. licensed and accredited cadaver dogs

Licensing is derived from anecdotal cases and is scenario based conducted over a period of a week, twice annually, it is conducted utilising independent A.C.P.O. authorised assessors.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm