Author Topic: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?  (Read 73534 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #30 on: January 09, 2020, 02:48:03 PM »
you claimed the alerts ahve been admitted in many cases in the UK...absolute rubbish.....youve cited two in scotland.

In the Pillay case the SCCRC ruled the alerts should not have been admitted...the Judge in your other cases may well have erred.

You think youve made a case that the alerts are admissible evidence....I think youve failed miserably. lets see some more of these many case you claim

As mentioned I only really need one case to prove that they are admissible. But in the spirit of fairness I know of 2 maybe that's not many but its enough. I over egged the pudding slightly.  Again who do you imagine has the higher authority the Court of Appeal in the High Court or the SCCRC.
And if dog alerts are inadmissible why were they allowed in the Margaret Fleming case in 2019.

Offline Davel

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #31 on: January 09, 2020, 02:53:11 PM »
As mentioned I only really need one case to prove that they are admissible. But in the spirit of fairness I know of 2 maybe that's not many but its enough. I over egged the pudding slightly.  Again who do you imagine has the higher authority the Court of Appeal in the High Court or the SCCRC.
And if dog alerts are inadmissible why were they allowed in the Margaret Fleming case in 2019.

It seems gilroy based his, appeal on the way his statements were taken and didn't question the alerts... Thst would be why the appeal court didn't address them.

Why were they admitted in the Fleming case... Quite possibly failure for the defence to challenge them


Offline G-Unit

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #32 on: January 09, 2020, 03:09:13 PM »
As mentioned I only really need one case to prove that they are admissible. But in the spirit of fairness I know of 2 maybe that's not many but its enough. I over egged the pudding slightly.  Again who do you imagine has the higher authority the Court of Appeal in the High Court or the SCCRC.
And if dog alerts are inadmissible why were they allowed in the Margaret Fleming case in 2019.

The significance of the dog alerts is, in my opinion, directly related to the amount of energy expended by those who claim they're not significant. No other subject brings forth so many exhibiting so much denial.
England - good effort

Offline Davel

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #33 on: January 09, 2020, 03:26:35 PM »
The significance of the dog alerts is, in my opinion, directly related to the amount of energy expended by those who claim they're not significant. No other subject brings forth so many exhibiting so much denial.
That's quite foolish imo..the alerts are what they are... Nothing here has any influence on that. 

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #34 on: January 09, 2020, 04:09:42 PM »
It seems gilroy based his, appeal on the way his statements were taken and didn't question the alerts... Thst would be why the appeal court didn't address them.

Why were they admitted in the Fleming case... Quite possibly failure for the defence to challenge them


Quick correction, the appeal court did address the alerts, to emphasise the evidence against Gilroy.
So you accept that uncorroborated dog alerts were allowed in the Fleming case which kind of agrees with my original post that uncorroborated dog alerts can be used as evidence in UK courts.

Offline Davel

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #35 on: January 09, 2020, 04:23:21 PM »


Quick correction, the appeal court did address the alerts, to emphasise the evidence against Gilroy.
So you accept that uncorroborated dog alerts were allowed in the Fleming case which kind of agrees with my original post that uncorroborated dog alerts can be used as evidence in UK courts.
The appeal court did not address the alerts... I don't believe they were, asked to.  The SCCRC did... And ruled them inadmissible..

Do you have a case from England... Anything in the last 20 years... No

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #36 on: January 09, 2020, 04:40:40 PM »
the podcast contained live audio statements from real experts...not armchair  bloggers....LOL

It matters not one bit if they are real experts, the only thing that matters is were they the presiding judges in both the original case and the 2012 appeal. I don't believe they were but maybe you can tell me differently.

Offline Davel

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #37 on: January 09, 2020, 04:45:09 PM »
It matters not one bit if they are real experts, the only thing that matters is were they the presiding judges in both the original case and the 2012 appeal. I don't believe they were but maybe you can tell me differently.

Judges make mistakes... The judge in the Gilroy case did.
The defence was poor... I would think in both Scottish csdes the evidence wasn't challenged... If it was... Based on expert opinion it wouldnt be admissible

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #38 on: January 09, 2020, 04:49:42 PM »
The appeal court did not address the alerts... I don't believe they were, asked to.  The SCCRC did... And ruled them inadmissible..

Do you have a case from England... Anything in the last 20 years... No

Read the bit I pasted again, the bit I put in bold where it says "the cadaver dogs reaction to his car" as further evidence that the appeal was unsuccessful. Again who is the Higher Authority the High Court or the SCCRC?
The SCCRC didn't really rule on anything, they shelved the case and never put it to appeal. They may have made a report that no-one has ever seen saying in their opinion that the dogs evidence should not have been admissable but again they don't get to make the final verdict on the evidence. I said in UK courts in my original post and Scotland the last time I checked is part of the UK.

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #39 on: January 09, 2020, 04:56:25 PM »
Judges make mistakes... The judge in the Gilroy case did.
The defence was poor... I would think in both Scottish csdes the evidence wasn't challenged... If it was... Based on expert opinion it wouldnt be admissible

I like the way you think you know more than a high court judge about what evidence should be allowed. What qualifies you to make this assumption.

Do you really believe in both cases the defence council never tried to get the dog evidence ruled as inadmissible.
Why would they not, that's ludicrous.

Do you think the presiding judge didn't take council from experts concerning the dog alerts and then form a judgement after deliberating on it.

Offline Davel

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #40 on: January 09, 2020, 05:04:30 PM »
I like the way you think you know more than a high court judge about what evidence should be allowed. What qualifies you to make this assumption.

Do you really believe in both cases the defence council never tried to get the dog evidence ruled as inadmissible.
Why would they not, that's ludicrous.

Do you think the presiding judge didn't take council from experts concerning the dog alerts and then form a judgement after deliberating on it.

If the judge had taken council from experts he wouldn't have admitted them. As I said in the Gilroy case they were later declared inadmissible.... But I've seen no evidence they were challenged

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #41 on: January 09, 2020, 05:15:07 PM »
If the judge had taken council from experts he wouldn't have admitted them. As I said in the Gilroy case they were later declared inadmissible.... But I've seen no evidence they were challenged

So the judge just decided to just wing it? Without expert advice? Do you know how much a case costs financially? To risk a case collapsing because a High Court judge decided to not take advice on evidence presented is beyond absurd.
They were never declared inadmissible by a court of law, never.
Do you mean challenged in court or challenged during pre-trial hearings? Because of course they were challenged by the defence during the trial, but is it your belief that the defence never tried to get the evidence ruled as inadmissible pre-trial?

Offline Davel

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #42 on: January 09, 2020, 05:49:56 PM »
So the judge just decided to just wing it? Without expert advice? Do you know how much a case costs financially? To risk a case collapsing because a High Court judge decided to not take advice on evidence presented is beyond absurd.
They were never declared inadmissible by a court of law, never.
Do you mean challenged in court or challenged during pre-trial hearings? Because of course they were challenged by the defence during the trial, but is it your belief that the defence never tried to get the evidence ruled as inadmissible pre-trial?

According  to the NCCRC.. the judge was wrong to admit the evidence... I would say Gilroys poor defence compounded the issue.. Did Gilroys defence call any witnesses to challenge the alerts... Based on the fact that every expert I've heard does not support uncorroborated alerts

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #43 on: January 09, 2020, 06:01:23 PM »
Hello everyone, new poster here. I thought it would be rude to just barge into the room unannounced so thought it best to start my own thread. I know it has been discussed previously and indeed currently here but I think etiquette requires me to introduce myself first.
I am quite new to the nuances of the case, only taking an active interest after the Netflix piece. Of course I knew of it before but never really had an opinion of what happened.  I still am not convinced about any of the theories so I hope I will keep an open mind.

One thing that seems to keep coming up on this forum is the dogs alerts are not evidence. I can't understand this reasoning as there are many cases that have gone through UK courts that have included uncorroborated evidence from dog alerts. This surely makes them evidence.  I know some will say, well Mr. Grime says they are not evidence but its not up to him to make that choice, it is surely up to the presiding judge to admit it as evidence or not. I can't see how its not evidence.
What do you think the dog alerts in the McCann case are evidence of?

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: Dog Alerts- Evidence or not?
« Reply #44 on: January 09, 2020, 06:04:06 PM »
According  to the NCCRC.. the judge was wrong to admit the evidence... I would say Gilroys poor defence compounded the issue.. Did Gilroys defence call any witnesses to challenge the alerts... Based on the fact that every expert I've heard does not support uncorroborated alerts

It doesn't matter what the SCCRC may have decided, they are not the deciding opinion. The deciding opinion will always be the rule of law. No court or decree has ever ruled the dog in the Gilroy case that gave an alert as inadmissible. They may in the future, who knows? But currently the facts stand that uncorroborated evidence from cadaver dogs have been allowed in a UK court. Can you not agree on that?

It doesn't matter if Gilroys defence called any witness to rebut the evidence of the dog, because my point is that it was allowed as evidence in the first place. But you have got to imagine they did don't you.