Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence

[sadie]

Why do you keep pushing these myths. We do not get crackling from decaying charred whole pigs.

The finest pork flavour is thought to come from pigs that have been hung for 9 days.  Depending on the cut, pigs are normally hung for 4-12 days.  It wouldn't take long for a dead pig to develop cadaver odour that would be discernable to the sensitive nose of a Cadavar dog

http://www.thepigsite.com/articles/2364/ageing-and-the-impact-on-meat-quality

A cadaver dog such as Eddie which was trained on dead pig would be able to alert to pork crackling because cadaver dogs are known to recognise the cadaver odour even after burning.  As stated before they were used in the forest fires in California to identify the dead.

There seems to be little doubt that a cadaver dog trained on pigs would alert to pork crackling IMO

Would a dog trainer would wish to advertise this weakness in the dogs likely range of identifying cadaver odiour ?   Would people paying good money for the dogs services want a dog that might be alerting to the cadaver odour of a pig, rather than a missing human ?

OMO, but what I am saying is logical based upon

1.  Our knowledge that Eddie was trained on dead pigs
2.  Dead pigs smell very like humans
3.  Pigs are hung for several days for the meat to mature if bred for pork, so would have a cadaver odour about them
4.  Dogs are used in forest fires etc to identify the burnt cadavers of humans, which would smell very like burnt cadavers of pigs ( Pork crackling included)


So, did someone who had been eating pork crackling / scratchings handle the paper or those folders on the counter above the cupboard that Cuddlecat was produced from ?

Eddie certainly didn't alert to Cuddlecat; he had just been playing with it, with no alert !!

[G-Unit]

The finest pork flavour is thought to come from pigs that have been hung for 9 days.  Depending on the cut, pigs are normally hung for 4-12 days.  It wouldn't take long for a dead pig to develop cadaver odour that would be discernable to the sensitive nose of a Cadavar dog

http://www.thepigsite.com/articles/2364/ageing-and-the-impact-on-meat-quality

A cadaver dog such as Eddie which was trained on dead pig would be able to alert to pork crackling because cadaver dogs are known to recognise the cadaver odour even after burning.  As stated before they were used in the forest fires in California to identify the dead.

There seems to be little doubt that a cadaver dog trained on pigs would alert to pork crackling IMO

Would a dog trainer would wish to advertise this weakness in the dogs likely range of identifying cadaver odiour ?   Would people paying good money for the dogs services want a dog that might be alerting to the cadaver odour of a pig, rather than a missing human ?

OMO, but what I am saying is logical based upon

1.  Our knowledge that Eddie was trained on dead pigs
2.  Dead pigs smell very like humans
3.  Pigs are hung for several days for the meat to mature if bred for pork, so would have a cadaver odour about them
4.  Dogs are used in forest fires etc to identify the burnt cadavers of humans, which would smell very like burnt cadavers of pigs ( Pork crackling included)


So, did someone who had been eating pork crackling / scratchings handle the paper or those folders on the counter above the cupboard that Cuddlecat was produced from ?

Eddie certainly didn't alert to Cuddlecat; he had just been playing with it, with no alert !!

In my opinion the attempts to cast doubt on Grime and his dog occasionally verge on the ridiculous.

There's a significant difference between a pig which has been hung and a decaying piglet used for training cadaver dogs. The clue is that the piglets are whole - there's nowt taken out.

Martin Grime said his dog alerted to Cuddle Cat. He is the expert and he was there. Armchair detectives, in my opinion, have no expertise and their opinions count for nothing.

 

[Mr Gray]

It is all the same difference.  Perfectly clear as mud.  You are clearly confused.  I find the solution weirdly normal.

I'm certainly  not confused..... Harrison... Grime say the, alerts, have no evidential value
Can anyone  post an expert supporting the use, and value of unconfirmed alerts

[Mr Gray]

In my opinion the attempts to cast doubt on Grime and his dog occasionally verge on the ridiculous.

There's a significant difference between a pig which has been hung and a decaying piglet used for training cadaver dogs. The clue is that the piglets are whole - there's nowt taken out.

Martin Grime said his dog alerted to Cuddle Cat. He is the expert and he was there. Armchair detectives, in my opinion, have no expertise and their opinions count for nothing.

Grime has, said, the, alerts, have, no evidential value... I totally agree, with him..
What is, surprising is, the, fact that the, dog trained, to react to cadaver on most occasions, originally didn't react to it... As in cuddle cat... Those, aren't my words, but the, words, of the, pj and, are in the, files

[Robittybob1]

Grime has, said, the, alerts, have, no evidential value... I totally agree, with him..
What is, surprising is, the, fact that the, dog trained, to react to cadaver on most occasions, originally didn't react to it... As in cuddle cat... Those, aren't my words, but the, words, of the, pj and, are in the, files

You'd better find them.  I have not seen that as yet.

[Mr Gray]

You'd better find them.  I have not seen that as yet.

I have posted them several times... Recently  too

[barrier]

The finest pork flavour is thought to come from pigs that have been hung for 9 days.  Depending on the cut, pigs are normally hung for 4-12 days.  It wouldn't take long for a dead pig to develop cadaver odour that would be discernable to the sensitive nose of a Cadavar dog

http://www.thepigsite.com/articles/2364/ageing-and-the-impact-on-meat-quality

A cadaver dog such as Eddie which was trained on dead pig would be able to alert to pork crackling because cadaver dogs are known to recognise the cadaver odour even after burning.  As stated before they were used in the forest fires in California to identify the dead.

There seems to be little doubt that a cadaver dog trained on pigs would alert to pork crackling IMO

Would a dog trainer would wish to advertise this weakness in the dogs likely range of identifying cadaver odiour ?   Would people paying good money for the dogs services want a dog that might be alerting to the cadaver odour of a pig, rather than a missing human ?

OMO, but what I am saying is logical based upon

1.  Our knowledge that Eddie was trained on dead pigs
2.  Dead pigs smell very like humans
3.  Pigs are hung for several days for the meat to mature if bred for pork, so would have a cadaver odour about them
4.  Dogs are used in forest fires etc to identify the burnt cadavers of humans, which would smell very like burnt cadavers of pigs ( Pork crackling included)


So, did someone who had been eating pork crackling / scratchings handle the paper or those folders on the counter above the cupboard that Cuddlecat was produced from ?

Eddie certainly didn't alert to Cuddlecat; he had just been playing with it, with no alert !!

Martin Grime.

'Eddie' The Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (E.V.R.D.) will search for and
locate human remains and body fluids including blood in any environment or
terrain. The initial training of the dog was conducted using human blood and
stil born decomposing piglets. The importance of this is that the dog is
introduced to the scent of a decomposing body NOT FOODSTUFF. This
ensures that the dog disregards the 'bacon sandwich' and 'kebab' etc that is
ever present in the background environment. Therefore the dog would
remain efficient searching for a cadaver in a café where the clientele were sat
eating bacon sandwiches. He has additionally trained exclusively using
human remains in the U.S.A. in association with the F.B.I. The enhanced
training of the dog has also involved the use of collection of 'cadaver scent'
odor from human corpses using remote technical equipment which does not
contact the subject. This method is comparable to the simulation of cross
contamination. It does however differ in that the remote scent samples
recovery does not involve subject matter and therefore is a 'pure' scent
sample. The dog has since initial training gained considerable experience in
successfully operationally locating human remains and evidential forensic
material.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

[Mr Gray]

You'd better find them.  I have not seen that as yet.

u) From the screening of the videos, referred previously, done when the dogs were working, some doubts arise. We don't want and we can't take the place of the trainer, we only wish to alert, with this paragraph, to some facts, that according to us, need further clarification.

v) If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times'

w) On one of the films, it's possible to see that 'Eddie' sniffs Madeleine's cuddle cat, more than once, bites it, throws it into the air and only after the toy is hidden does he 'mark' it (page 2099). Whys didn't he signal it when he sniffs it on the first time'


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

[Mr Gray]

It is all the same difference.  Perfectly clear as mud.  You are clearly confused.  I find the solution weirdly normal.

I am not clearly confused... Your post should at least carry... IMO... Please alter

[Miss Taken Identity]

In my opinion the attempts to cast doubt on Grime and his dog occasionally verge on the ridiculous.

There's a significant difference between a pig which has been hung and a decaying piglet used for training cadaver dogs. The clue is that the piglets are whole - there's nowt taken out.

Martin Grime said his dog alerted to Cuddle Cat. He is the expert and he was there. Armchair detectives, in my opinion, have no expertise and their opinions count for nothing.

"Armchair detectives, in my opinion, have no expertise and their opinions count for nothing".

But for entertainment value it is priceless.

This  should dispel any sillyness:

"This ensures that the dog disregards the 'bacon sandwich' and 'kebab' etc that is
ever present in the background environment. Therefore the dog would
remain efficient searching for a cadaver in a café where the clientele were sat
eating bacon sandwiches. He has additionally trained exclusively using
human remains in the U.S.A. in association with the F.B.I."


The dogs gave alerts to what they were trained to alert to. No point in giving yourself grief over it.

 If presented in court this 'evidence' would be added to other evidence (perhaps circumstantial)and expert witnesses such as Amaral  et el. 

Hmmm interesting indeed!

[Robittybob1]

I am not clearly confused... Your post should at least carry... IMO... Please alter

Oxymoron

[Robittybob1]

I have posted them several times... Recently  too

I want you to show me what the source of this sentence is "What is, surprising is, the, fact that the, dog trained, to react to cadaver on most occasions, originally didn't react to it... As in cuddle cat... Those, aren't my words, but the, words, of the, pj and, are in the, files"?
Where in the files?
That is the third time you have resisted finding a requested cite, I will delete your posts without cites in the future.

[Mr Gray]

I want you to show me what the source of this sentence is "What is, surprising is, the, fact that the, dog trained, to react to cadaver on most occasions, originally didn't react to it... As in cuddle cat... Those, aren't my words, but the, words, of the, pj and, are in the, files"?
Where in the files?
That is the third time you have resisted finding a requested cite, I will delete your posts without cites in th6e future.

Now who is clearly confused.. Post 952 this morning

You need to read the posts before making such a fool of yourself

Most posters have seen this several times before... It's in the files... And I've posted the cite many times

[Mr Gray]

Oxymoron

You have no right to state as a fact that I am clearly confused when it's just your opinion... And you are clearly confused.. Imo

[Robittybob1]

u) From the screening of the videos, referred previously, done when the dogs were working, some doubts arise. We don't want and we can't take the place of the trainer, we only wish to alert, with this paragraph, to some facts, that according to us, need further clarification.

v) If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times'

w) On one of the films, it's possible to see that 'Eddie' sniffs Madeleine's cuddle cat, more than once, bites it, throws it into the air and only after the toy is hidden does he 'mark' it (page 2099). Whys didn't he signal it when he sniffs it on the first time'


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

I have pointed out several times in my analysis there is no alert at all on Cuddle Cat. 

It is good to see the overseeing body expressed doubts about that too.
What wasn't so great was that they still accepted that Eddie alerted to CC when hidden, but I still maintain there is no proof CC  was in the sideboard at the time of the alerts.