Author Topic: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?  (Read 166181 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #810 on: June 09, 2020, 06:46:09 PM »
Finally found what Martin Grime said in relation to the alerts behind the
“It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to 'a cadaver scent'
contaminant. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this
alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence“.

Note Grime said cadaver scent contaminant...not a cadaver. sceptics almost all read this as cadaver...they are wrong

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #811 on: June 09, 2020, 07:06:53 PM »
Yes I know... So in this statement he days it's possible... Not probable.  Elsewhere he talks of physically recoverable forensic evidence.  It isn't just Grime... Harrison and Grimes academic superior Professor Cassella say the same thing

Yes this is the point. It’s “possible”. That’s why analysts of the evidence collected is absolutely crucial.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #812 on: June 09, 2020, 07:16:57 PM »
Yes this is the point. It’s “possible”. That’s why analysts of the evidence collected is absolutely crucial.
i would rather leave it to SY...the German and portuguese police...none seem to agree with you

Offline Gertrude

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #813 on: June 09, 2020, 10:03:11 PM »
Not according  to Grime in his statements at PDL... He does seem to have changed his tune recently which makes him an inconsistent witness.

IMO he has never changed his tune. I would say you are misunderstanding his words. You quote the 2008 report where he says the alerts need to be 'corroborated'. It does not specify that corroboration needs to be forensic. So he is not unreliable.

If there is no testimony in the investigation supporting the alerts it's not really anything to do with Grime. He can't assess something that doesn't exist. His later White paper states;

'The use of this type of detection canine always require interpretation of results as to the weight of case intelligence and corroboration via scientific means or anecdotal witness evidence.'

'They are not considered quantitative, and responses require corroboration, either instrumentally, visually, or by anecdotal witness testimony.'

 The 2008 report concluded the alerts couldn't be corroborated at that time. It doesn't mean they can never be either as Grime says by instrumentally or witness testimony. If for instance a witness came forward who had seen a death in 5a.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #814 on: June 09, 2020, 10:08:00 PM »
IMO he has never changed his tune. I would say you are misunderstanding his words. You quote the 2008 report where he says the alerts need to be 'corroborated'. It does not specify that corroboration needs to be forensic. So he is not unreliable.

If there is no testimony in the investigation supporting the alerts it's not really anything to do with Grime. He can't assess something that doesn't exist. His later White paper states;

'The use of this type of detection canine always require interpretation of results as to the weight of case intelligence and corroboration via scientific means or anecdotal witness evidence.'

'They are not considered quantitative, and responses require corroboration, either instrumentally, visually, or by anecdotal witness testimony.'

 The 2008 report concluded the alerts couldn't be corroborated at that time. It doesn't mean they can never be either as Grime says by instrumentally or witness testimony. If for instance a witness came forward who had seen a death in 5a.

We've been through this before.. In 2007 Grime, said the alert needed to be corroborated by forensic evidence...

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #815 on: June 10, 2020, 12:17:36 AM »
Note Grime said cadaver scent contaminant...not a cadaver. sceptics almost all read this as cadaver...they are wrong

We all know that a cadaver wasn't in Apartment 5A at the time the dogs were used. The issue is where did the cadaverine originate. The Police use a second dog (when there is no body) in an attempt to pinpoint areas where it may be possible to find human blood. Keela if you read the report was incredibly accurate in relation to finding the exact spot where swab 3A yielded human cellular material. To the point where they removed an extra tile to find tiny traces of human cellular material in the area where the dog alerted.

To quote Martin Grime "The second dog that we've seen work today is the crime scene dog Keela. She will only indicate to me when she has found human blood, only human blood and it is only blood and there must be something there physically for her to be able to alert to me that's she has actually found something. At this point over here where the victim recovery dog has indicated, as you saw on the video, the crime scene dog had actually given me what we call a passive indication where she freezes in this spot here which would indicate to me that there is some human blood there. She will find blood that's historically very old and she will find anybody's blood, any human blood, which is important to make sure that everybody knows. The fact that there is other scientific methods being used may stop you recovering any DNA but if you try we'll see what happens. But she is very, very good and when she indicates there is always blood there"

And to quote from the PJ Files: 12 Volume XII pages 3195 to 3206.
Expert Examination 200711732-CR/L
Requester: DIC Portimao Policia Judiciaria
Case: 201/07.0GALGS
Fax: 638 dated 10 August 2007
Examination date: 1 August 2007

"Subsequently it was asked of the undersigned that they watched the films of the searches performed by the dog specialised in detection of human blood so that they obtained an understanding of the area from where the tiles should be collected and how many tiles they should collect.

After seeing the images and in agreement with the officers of DIC of Portimao it was defined that the undersigned should proceed with the recovery of four tiles. It was also defined that this operation of recovery of the tiles would also be filmed.

When looking at the images referred to above it was observed that the floor tiles to be recovered were situated in an area of the living room next to a window where there was a sofa and that the tiles referred to were underneath that sofa.

Detailed shots of the living room area and floor area from which the tiles should be collected.
As requested by investigating officers of the DIC of Portimao it was performed the lifting and respective recovery of the four tiles and of the skirting board next to them (they being identified with numbers 1 to 4) using a tile trimmer, a flat chisel and a hammer.

After the recovery of the four tiles and the skirting board the dog specialised in the detection of traces of human blood was put into the area from where the tiles had been recovered, the English police officer who coordinated the movement of the dog, Martin Grime, having informed the undersigned that they should proceed with the recovery of another piece of tile that was close to the area from where the tile identified as number 1 had been lifted, that terminating the recovery of the tiles signalled by the dog. As requested the undersigned performed the lifting of and the recovery of the piece of tile indicated."

Both dogs did the job they were trained to do. There is nothing they added to the investigation to prove a corpse had been in the apartment but the cadaverine contaminant has come from somewhere and something only the McCann's had contact with. It wasn't from nappies or rotting meat - could it have been the post mortem's Kate reportedly attended? I work in a hospital and have never been aware of a GP or anaesthetist having direct contact with a corpse during a PM - but it's worthy of further investigation. Particularly given there is a missing person whose chances of now being alive are statistically very unlikely in my opinion.

Also given the dogs 90% - 95% accuracy the chances of both of them mistakenly alerting to items belonging to only one family are miniscule. Far from being "irrelevant" it throws up incredibly serious scientific questions.


« Last Edit: June 10, 2020, 08:51:36 AM by Billy Whizz Fan Club »

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #816 on: June 10, 2020, 07:14:40 AM »
If Martin Grime and his dogs are the pinnacle of excellence I trust they will soon be seen running round properties belonging to Christian Bruckner.
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #817 on: June 10, 2020, 08:42:45 AM »
If Martin Grime and his dogs are the pinnacle of excellence I trust they will soon be seen running round properties belonging to Christian Bruckner.
Let's hope so.
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 Eleanor

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #818 on: June 10, 2020, 09:16:25 AM »
If Martin Grime and his dogs are the pinnacle of excellence I trust they will soon be seen running round properties belonging to Christian Bruckner.

Bet he's keeping his head down.

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #819 on: June 10, 2020, 10:55:22 AM »
Bet he's keeping his head down.

He has no need to and I’m sure dogs will be used in any search of land associated with the possibility that the body of Madeleine McCann has been concealed.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #820 on: June 10, 2020, 11:05:08 AM »
He has no need to and I’m sure dogs will be used in any search of land associated with the possibility that the body of Madeleine McCann has been concealed.

Quite likely.  But poor old Eddie was flawed, although not his fault.  And of course, there was No Body.

The principle is good, but the dog needs to be restricted between Body Fluids and Actual Cadavers.

Offline Gertrude

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #821 on: June 10, 2020, 01:22:08 PM »
We've been through this before.. In 2007 Grime, said the alert needed to be corroborated by forensic evidence...

Sorry don't agree but you know that. IMO He's talking about what's happening in that particular investigation at that time with the evidence they have, ie. they 'may become corroborated' by the forensics
he is not excluding them ever being corroborated by other means.



 

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #822 on: June 10, 2020, 01:45:06 PM »
Sorry don't agree but you know that. IMO He's talking about what's happening in that particular investigation at that time with the evidence they have, ie. they 'may become corroborated' by the forensics
he is not excluding them ever being corroborated by other means.

Therefore in this particular case, as no human remains were located, the only
alert indications that may become corroborated are those that the CSI dog
indicated by forensic laboratory analysis.


You seem to be in denial...the meaning is quite clear that the only alerts that may become corroborated are the CSI..

hes talking about this case

Offline kizzy

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #823 on: June 10, 2020, 02:02:06 PM »
We've been through this before.. In 2007 Grime, said the alert needed to be corroborated by forensic evidence...

Yes it needed to be corroborated - so he did find something, not nothing as you like to make out.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #824 on: June 10, 2020, 02:11:48 PM »
Yes it needed to be corroborated - so he did find something, not nothing as you like to make out.

what was found did not corroborate the Cadave alerts...are you reading the psots. grime makes it CLEAR the cadaver alerts are NOT corroborated

see post 822