Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence

[faithlilly]

A few possibilities:

1. She did die in that flat
1.a and Eddie correctly alerted to her cadaver odour.
1.b  She did die in the flat, and Eddie coincidentally alerted to some irrelevant human decomposition scent.

2. She left the flat alive, and Eddie's alerts were to some irrelevant human decomposition scent

The problem I have is that a) no evidence was found, b) quite apart from the forensics people, etc., the flat had been occupied by 4 lots of people, the last lot leaving just one week prior to the dog inspection, and AFAIK there aren't any witness statements from any of them in the PJ files, c) nowhere is it stated clearly exactly what "items he is trained to find" (cf the car video) actually includes or excludes.

Can it be excluded that he sniffed the scent of a bloody sock or plaster left lying around for a while by one of the post-disappearance occupants prior to removal? The PJ did organise interviews from pre-disappearance occupants, but apparently none of the post- ones? Wouldn't it have been logical to do so?

If scent tends to cling to porous materials... The flat was used for holiday rentals. Did anyone think to turn over the mattress?

Are you suggesting that a bloody sock or plaster which was once in 5a would cause Eddie to alert ? That there was only ever someone with a plaster in 5a and no other apartment screened by Eddie ?

[Carana]

Are you suggesting that a bloody sock or plaster which was once in 5a would cause Eddie to alert ? That there was only ever someone with a plaster in 5a and no other apartment screened by Eddie ?

If the post-disappearance occupants had been interviewed, we might have the answer to that.

If the other flats had been regularly occupied, they would presumably be cleaned and aired on a regular basis. 5A was presumably shut up for the week prior.

It may not have been a sock or a plaster, did anyone check the underside of the mattress?

[faithlilly]

If the post-disappearance occupants had been interviewed, we might have the answer to that.

If the other flats had been regularly occupied, they would presumably be cleaned and aired on a regular basis. 5A was presumably shut up for the week prior.

It may not have been a sock or a plaster, did anyone check the underside of the mattress?

Apart from a very short period in time 5a was let, and cleaned, just like the other apartments and certainly before the dogs were brought in.

Doesn’t it stretch credibility for you that the only apartment in which Eddie alerted is the only apartment where someone ever left traces of blood and, coincidently, is the very apartment where a child has gone missing?

[G-Unit]

Apart from a very short period in time 5a was let, and cleaned, just like the other apartments and certainly before the dogs were brought in.

Doesn’t it stretch credibility for you that the only apartment in which Eddie alerted is the only apartment where someone ever left traces of blood and, coincidently, is the very apartment where a child has gone missing?

I've never understood why people take the trouble to try to think of innocent reasons for Eddie's alerts. Who are they trying to convince?

[Carana]

Apart from a very short period in time 5a was let, and cleaned, just like the other apartments and certainly before the dogs were brought in.

Doesn’t it stretch credibility for you that the only apartment in which Eddie alerted is the only apartment where someone ever left traces of blood and, coincidently, is the very apartment where a child has gone missing?

I didn't say never, for a start.

It's unlikely that we'll ever know how much - if any - possibly unconscious stress / excitement Eddie could have picked up on (5a was his first inspection upon arrival).

Dog alerts by salaried police dog handlers have proven irrelevant at times, but they go back and continue to get paid their salary.

Grime was embarking on a solo career and I find it highly improbable that he wasn't aware of where she'd disappeared from, nor which car the McCanns had hired.

If the dogs hadn't alerted to anything, how would that have enhanced his career? He did use footage from the McCannn-related inspections to showcase his dogs for the Jersey contract.

I'm not saying that it was deliberate, but simply the dog could have picked up on unconscious signals. Is there any way of excluding that possibility?

On the other hand, the same could be said of Murat's place... but were the PJ as hot on that lead by that stage or not?

[Carana]

I've never understood why people take the trouble to try to think of innocent reasons for Eddie's alerts. Who are they trying to convince?

Don't most modern police investigations attempt to exclude innocent explanations? Lessons may have been learned since the "good ol' days" of the '70s.

[Carana]

Given the small number of miscarriages of justice it has to be the best approach.

In which countries?

[Brietta]

Apart from a very short period in time 5a was let, and cleaned, just like the other apartments and certainly before the dogs were brought in.

Doesn’t it stretch credibility for you that the only apartment in which Eddie alerted is the only apartment where someone ever left traces of blood and, coincidently, is the very apartment where a child has gone missing?

It has certainly bolstered credulity in some while others ponder why it is that there is no evidence that anyone anywhere at anytime in Luz lost as much as a drop of blood.  In my opinion that stretches credibility just a tad.

[slartibartfast]

It certainly is better to be innocent.... Answering questions  in a, hostile environment  may not be

So how many miscarriages have been caused because the defendant truthfully answered questions?

[slartibartfast]

I've never understood why people take the trouble to try to think of innocent reasons for Eddie's alerts. Who are they trying to convince?

I don’t have a problem with innocent reasons for the alerts and I would be fairly confident that the investigators would have identified those likely contaminants if they existed.

[Carana]

I don’t have a problem with innocent reasons for the alerts and I would be fairly confident that the investigators would have identified those likely contaminants if they existed.

If so, where is the evidence in the files?

[faithlilly]

I didn't say never, for a start.

It's unlikely that we'll ever know how much - if any - possibly unconscious stress / excitement Eddie could have picked up on (5a was his first inspection upon arrival).

Dog alerts by salaried police dog handlers have proven irrelevant at times, but they go back and continue to get paid their salary.

Grime was embarking on a solo career and I find it highly improbable that he wasn't aware of where she'd disappeared from, nor which car the McCanns had hired.

If the dogs hadn't alerted to anything, how would that have enhanced his career? He did use footage from the McCannn-related inspections to showcase his dogs for the Jersey contract.

I'm not saying that it was deliberate, but simply the dog could have picked up on unconscious signals. Is there any way of excluding that possibility?

On the other hand, the same could be said of Murat's place... but were the PJ as hot on that lead by that stage or not?

I agree with your lost comment. By the time of the dog searches the McCanns had expensive legal support so wouldn't it have been simpler, if the dogs were being lead in a certain direction, for that direction to be Murat rather than the McCanns ? Why do you believe it had to be the McCanns you were targeted ?

Edit - moderation comment removed

[Vertigo Swirl]

I've never understood why people take the trouble to try to think of innocent reasons for Eddie's alerts. Who are they trying to convince?

accept nothing.  Believe no one (including dogs).  confirm everything.  A simple rule of thumb which doesn't just apply to one side of the argument.

[G-Unit]

accept nothing.  Believe no one (including dogs).  confirm everything.  A simple rule of thumb which doesn't just apply to one side of the argument.

A simple rule used by police officers, not an excuse for inventing scenarios without evidence.

[Vertigo Swirl]

A simple rule used by police officers, not an excuse for inventing scenarios without evidence.

including inventing the scenario that the child died in the apartment and her body carried through PdL, or that the body was kept frozen and transported in the hire car 23 days later.