Author Topic: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence  (Read 151774 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1425 on: March 29, 2018, 10:02:23 AM »
Grime said it was his opinion that the alert was possibly to ...or suggestive...of cadaver odour....Thats the evidence from grime...you believe something different...so you dont understand the evidence

So he didn’t say ‘this is definitely not ‘ cadaver scent ?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline G-Unit

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1426 on: March 29, 2018, 11:00:59 AM »
So he didn’t say ‘this is definitely not ‘ cadaver scent ?

He also didn't say he didn't know, nor did he suggest any other substances which might have triggered Eddie's alerts.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Carana

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1427 on: March 29, 2018, 11:39:42 AM »
He also didn't say he didn't know, nor did he suggest any other substances which might have triggered Eddie's alerts.

No one knew that Eddie could also react to blood from a living human being until he was specifically asked in his rogatory statement made a year later... As, unfortunately he wasn't asked about any other substances, perhaps we'll never know.

Offline Angelo222

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1428 on: March 29, 2018, 12:33:49 PM »
No one knew that Eddie could also react to blood from a living human being until he was specifically asked in his rogatory statement made a year later... As, unfortunately he wasn't asked about any other substances, perhaps we'll never know.

The interesting thing about the cadaver dog inspections is that Eddie only reacted to places visited, a car hired by and stuff belonging to the missing girls parents. Does everyone really believe in coincidences??
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1429 on: March 29, 2018, 12:50:20 PM »
The interesting thing about the cadaver dog inspections is that Eddie only reacted to places visited, a car hired by and stuff belonging to the missing girls parents. Does everyone really believe in coincidences??
On the first look at it it doesn't look good, but there could still be an alternative explanation.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Angelo222

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1430 on: March 29, 2018, 01:18:36 PM »
On the first look at it it doesn't look good, but there could still be an alternative explanation.

Such as?
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Lace

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1431 on: March 29, 2018, 01:59:07 PM »
The interesting thing about the cadaver dog inspections is that Eddie only reacted to places visited, a car hired by and stuff belonging to the missing girls parents. Does everyone really believe in coincidences??

Too much of a coincidence if you ask me.   Lo and behold Kate's clothes also alerted to,  Kate who had been accused by the PJ.   Why not Gerry's clothes?   Kate was wearing those trousers a few days after Madeleine went missing,  does anyone believe she would have worn them with cadaver scent on them?  Really?   IMO

Offline Carana

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1432 on: March 29, 2018, 01:59:26 PM »
The interesting thing about the cadaver dog inspections is that Eddie only reacted to places visited, a car hired by and stuff belonging to the missing girls parents. Does everyone really believe in coincidences??

If you go into a game show and you know in advance that potential prizes are in the red boxes, and you choose them... is that coincidence?

Offline Carana

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1433 on: March 29, 2018, 02:04:50 PM »
Too much of a coincidence if you ask me.   Lo and behold Kate's clothes also alerted to,  Kate who had been accused by the PJ.   Why not Gerry's clothes?   Kate was wearing those trousers a few days after Madeleine went missing,  does anyone believe she would have worn them with cadaver scent on them?  Really?   IMO

No one else seems to find it odd that there was only one pair of underwear (one pair of Kate's knickers) in the whole lot.

Either, after 4 months, their only other underwear was what they were wearing that day, or underwear wasn't considered suitable for the sniffing exercise. Why should they be excluded unless there was a possibility of false alerts?

ETA: And where were these other pairs of underwear when the other clothes were taken? Had any been together prior to washing?

« Last Edit: March 29, 2018, 02:06:59 PM by Carana »

Offline Lace

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1434 on: March 29, 2018, 02:20:00 PM »
No one else seems to find it odd that there was only one pair of underwear (one pair of Kate's knickers) in the whole lot.

Either, after 4 months, their only other underwear was what they were wearing that day, or underwear wasn't considered suitable for the sniffing exercise. Why should they be excluded unless there was a possibility of false alerts?

ETA: And where were these other pairs of underwear when the other clothes were taken? Had any been together prior to washing?

A very strange exercise if you ask me.   Eddie in the end snatched up some of Kate's clothes in a playful way,  plus a t shirt which looked as though it belonged to Sean,  but was 'Madeleine's'   very strange IMO

Offline Carana

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1435 on: March 29, 2018, 02:57:35 PM »
A very strange exercise if you ask me.   Eddie in the end snatched up some of Kate's clothes in a playful way,  plus a t shirt which looked as though it belonged to Sean,  but was 'Madeleine's'   very strange IMO

The first item was a tiny pair of blue shorts.

Grime didn't have a list of the items, and referred them to the PT police for one. Who was actually responsible for noting what was an alert or not?

Was this an established exercise used by him in other case searches, or was this an experiment?


Offline G-Unit

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1436 on: March 29, 2018, 03:39:20 PM »
The interesting thing about the cadaver dog inspections is that Eddie only reacted to places visited, a car hired by and stuff belonging to the missing girls parents. Does everyone really believe in coincidences??

It seems the only explanations people seem to be able to think of is;

a) suggest foul play
b) suggest incompetence
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1437 on: March 29, 2018, 04:01:25 PM »
Such as?
Why I said "On the first look at it it doesn't look good, but there could still be an alternative explanation" was because I believe there are alternative explanations.  I was working on the idea in the thread ""both Kate and Gerry have both publicly contested the alerts to cadaver" T/F?" http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9281.0, for IMO Kate and Gerry never say there were no cadaver alerts in those places, but they do say it wasn't Madeleine. 

If someone showed me a clear denial of the cadaver dog alerts by the McCanns I might have reconsidered, but the nearest we got to a denial was that "cadaver dogs are unreliable" by Gerry or Kate's "unconscious cuing" excuse.

So I looked for other reasons they could be aware of a cadaver odour source that wasn't Madeleine.
I don't go along with deceased piglets brought into the apartment.  To me no one has really eliminated the possibility that there had been another death of someone else, the body being held temporarily in the apartment.
Amaral tried to show no one else had died prior to the 3rd, but he did not show no one else died on the night of the 3rd.  Particularly the demise of another child, small enough to be hidden in the sports bag.

OK the question then becomes "when could they have first been aware of this"? 
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Angelo222

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1438 on: March 29, 2018, 04:05:20 PM »
Why I said "On the first look at it it doesn't look good, but there could still be an alternative explanation" was because I believe there are alternative explanations.  I was working on the idea in the thread ""both Kate and Gerry have both publicly contested the alerts to cadaver" T/F?" http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9281.0, for IMO Kate and Gerry never say there were no cadaver alerts in those places, but they do say it wasn't Madeleine. 

If someone showed me a clear denial of the cadaver dog alerts by the McCanns I might have reconsidered, but the nearest we got to a denial was that "cadaver dogs are unreliable" by Gerry or Kate's "unconscious cuing" excuse.

So I looked for other reasons they could be aware of a cadaver odour source that wasn't Madeleine.
I don't go along with deceased piglets brought into the apartment.  To me no one has really eliminated the possibility that there had been another death of someone else, the body being held temporarily in the apartment.
Amaral tried to show no one else had died prior to the 3rd, but he did not show no one else died on the night of the 3rd.  Particularly the demise of another child, small enough to be hidden in the sports bag.

OK the question then becomes "when could they have first been aware of this"?

What has that to do with the fact that the cadaver dog only reacted to McCann-related objects?  Noticeably, Eddie spent hours going through the Murat's property and not even a squeak... explain that if you can Robbo?
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence
« Reply #1439 on: March 29, 2018, 04:16:38 PM »
What has that to do with the fact that the cadaver dog only reacted to McCann-related objects?  Noticeably, Eddie spent hours going through the Murat's property and not even a squeak... explain that if you can Robbo?
Could it be due to the McCanns or other people moving this other cadaver around the apartment.  Wherever GA says  Madeleine could have been placed the other cadaver could have been put in the same place.  The dogs don't differentiate between cadavers, they are only seeking cadaver odour not Madeleine's cadaver odour in particular.  Hence Grime saying "they needed corroborating evidence", why?; to determine the cadaver.   Also remember cadaver odour takes a couple of hour on average to develop, so there is a difference between handling a freshly deceased body and one that has been sitting for 7 hours or more.

If there was no cadaver odour in Murat's property, that is fine. 
« Last Edit: March 29, 2018, 10:31:01 PM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.