UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: faithlilly on June 29, 2019, 03:20:11 PM
-
An interesting series is now showing on Netflix about different kinds of evidence presented in court and their reliability. Martin Grime’s work is heavily featured in the programme about cadaver dogs but especially his work in the Bianca Jones trial, the child who went missing, following what her father said, was a carjacking.
Martin Grime was flown over to Detroit with his dog Morse and while searching places connected with Lane Morse alerted to several areas, including Bianca’s car seat. The programme appeared to be trying to sow doubt about the work of Morse and the safety of Lane’s conviction however not a word was mentioned in regard to Bianca’s older sister’s evidence to the court.
“ First on the witness stand was the defendant's 8-year-old daughter Il'Andra. Under questioning by Assistant Wayne County Prosecutor Qiana Luller, the youngster testified how her father became angry when she wet the bed, punishing her with the urine-soaked underwear which tore the underside of her tongue.
Il'Andra said Lane held the underwear to her face.
"And, when the panties went in your mouth, how did that feel?" asked Luller.
"Weird," the girl said.
After identifying a photo of what she referred to as "the stick," IL'Andra testified that her father had used it on Bianca when she wouldn't answer his questions. "She got whooped with it," IL'Andra said.”
And from another report.
“The 8-year-old daughter of a Detroit man charged with murder following the disappearance of his 2-year-old daughter has testified that she didn't see her sibling awake the morning of the younger girl's reported kidnapping.
The 8-year-old said Tuesday during D'Andre Lane's preliminary examination in Detroit's 36th District Court that a blanket was covering Bianca Jones' face and that her sister didn't say anything or move while on the way to school in Lane's car.
The girl also told the court a few days before Bianca vanished, Lane hit the toddler with a stick.”
Does anyone on this forum really believe that Morse was wrong and Lane is an innocent man ?
-
First I've heard of this case so have no idea.
Here's what the trial judge said:
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/defenders/judge-vonda-evans-opens-up-about-bianca-jones-case-for-first-time
-
No more libelling of Martin Grime. We have enough diss the dogs threads.
-
No more libelling of Martin Grime. We have enough diss the dogs threads.
I've explained already I don't believe grime intentionally misled the judge.. But IMO she misunderstood what he meant and was therefore misled
-
I've explained already I don't believe grime intentionally misled the judge.. But IMO she misunderstood what he meant and was therefore misled
So he didn’t mislead her then.
-
So he didn’t mislead her then.
She was misled by Grimes statement.. But it was not intentional.. Is that clear enough for you
-
And yet your quite happy to let a post stand which compares the McCanns to a convicted murderer on the basis that they didn’t personally call the Portuguese police despite the fact that they appealed for the police to be called within half an hour of the disappearance? Such are the double standards we’ve come to know and love on this forum @)(++(*
When did MBM disappear?
When, if at all, did the McCanns insist the police were called?
-
When did MBM disappear?
When, if at all, did the McCanns insist the police were called?
1) 3rd May 2007 in the evening
2) 3rd May 2007 in the evening
-
The thread title is the Lane Case... Once again the mods seem happy for it to descend into a McCann hatefest... Pathetic
-
1) 3rd May 2007 in the evening
2) 3rd May 2007 in the evening
OK, so you have no idea when Madeleine disappeared.
And you have no idea if or when the McCanns insisted the police were called.
Thanks for clarifying.
-
OK, so you have no idea when Madeleine disappeared.
And you have no idea if or when the McCanns insisted the police were called.
Thanks for clarifying.
Yes I do and yes I do. Please don’t misrepresent me, thanks.
-
It isn't a problem... The cases have little else in common
Both children were girls.
Both were claimed to be abducted.
A cadaver dog alerted to the parents car in both cases.
Both children are still missing.
-
Both children were girls.
Both were claimed to be abducted.
A cadaver dog alerted to the parents car in both cases.
Both children are still missing.
Yes but one was called Madeleine and one Bianca.. The most significant difference is one was named after, someone on eastenders, and one wasn't.. What do you think
-
OK, so you have no idea when Madeleine disappeared.
And you have no idea if or when the McCanns insisted the police were called.
Thanks for clarifying.
So you are using misrepresentation again
-
It isn't a problem... The cases have little else in common
Two small children disappeared.
A cadaver dog alerted to places and items related to that child.
Nah nothing in common at all @)(++(*
-
Two small children disappeared.
A cadaver dog alerted to places and items related to that child.
Nah nothing in common at all @)(++(*
I don't want to insult you grasp of the English language but I never said the cases had nothing in common
-
I don't want to insult you grasp of the English language but I never said the cases had nothing in common
@)(++(* It doesn’t now, after a swift bit of editing. Priceless.
You really are comedy gold.
-
@)(++(* It doesn’t now, after a swift bit of editing. Priceless.
You really are comedy gold.
What post did Davel edit after your one at 6.31pm?
-
@)(++(* It doesn’t now, after a swift bit of editing. Priceless.
You really are comedy gold.
I said the cases have little in common.... Not have nothing in common... Get your facts right ..I didn't edit the post.. You are mistaken
-
I said the cases have little in common.... Not have nothing in common... Get your facts right ..I didn't edit the post.. Dont tell lies
So what is the ‘little’ they do have in common, IYO ?
-
So what is the ‘little’ they do have in common, IYO ?
So you've accepted your mistake
-
So you've accepted your mistake
Accepted..shall we move on ?
-
An interesting series is now showing on Netflix about different kinds of evidence presented in court and their reliability. Martin Grime’s work is heavily featured in the programme about cadaver dogs but especially his work in the Bianca Jones trial, the child who went missing, following what her father said, was a carjacking.
... snip....
What is the series called?
-
What is the series called?
Exhibit A.
-
There are two different dogs involved. Eddie and Morse.
-
There are two different dogs involved. Eddie and Morse.
And one handler.
-
And one handler.
Eddie was never a proper Cadaver Dog.
-
Eddie was never a proper Cadaver Dog.
Yes he was.
-
Yes he was.
Agreed, anyone saying otherwise may have an agenda.
-
Eddie was a Search and Rescue Dog who was then expected to take on new trick without being able to forget the old ones. Consequently, no one was sure what he was alerting to.
-
Agreed, anyone saying otherwise may have an agenda.
Ideed. I wonder what possible motivation Grime and his dog have for pretending to point to a possible death scene/scent?
On the other hand what motivation would a killer have for dismissing this circumstancial evidence tied up with the horrific evidence given by the 8 year old child- subjected to child abuse.
I never believed his story from day one, when I heard about from my colleague in the states.
-
I'm wondering why Martin Grime and his dogs, attached to S.Yorks police, are used all over the country/world?
I appreciate the dogs are expensive to train but a country like US is not without its own resources.
-
I'm wondering why Martin Grime and his dogs, attached to S.Yorks police, are used all over the country/world?
I appreciate the dogs are expensive to train but a country like US is not without its own resources.
Perhaps there is more to Grime than his public persona,gained mostly but not wholly I suspect because of the Madeleine case.
-
I'm wondering why Martin Grime and his dogs, attached to S.Yorks police, are used all over the country/world?
I appreciate the dogs are expensive to train but a country like US is not without its own resources.
I don't believe they are.. They have been used in the UK and the USA
A FOI request from a member of this forum showed only used 35 times in 5 years
My opinion on why Grime was used in this case is his claim if no false positives... I find that misleading but it certainly might be very convincing to a jury... Does any other handler make that claim
-
Perhaps there is more to Grime than his public persona,gained mostly but not wholly I suspect because of the Madeleine case.
That's a very pertinent point.. We know Grime used the video from PDL to secure his lucrative contract in Jersey
-
I don't believe they are.. They have been used in the UK and the USA
A FOI request from a member of this forum showed only used 35 times in 5 years
My opinion on why Grime was used in this case is his claim if no false positives... I find that misleading but it certainly might be very convincing to a jury... Does any other handler make that claim
They were obviously used in Portugal, the case above in US and someone cited a case in Scotland.
Why S.Yorks?
-
I wonder if the defence in this case were aware if Grime statement Re the alerts having no evidential reliability... I'm fairly sure they were not... How could the alerts be admitted after this statement by grime
-
They were obviously used in Portugal, the case above in US and someone cited a case in Scotland.
Why S.Yorks?
IMO... From what I have heard... Is that it is because Grime actively markets himself..... And his dogs that have never had a false positive... Which to me is misleading
-
How could alerts that have no evidential value be admitted as evidence.... IMO the defence was not aware of that statement
-
How could alerts that have no evidential value be admitted as evidence.... IMO the defence was not aware of that statement
So words used in one particular case are a benchmark and a standard for all other's?
-
So words used in one particular case are a benchmark and a standard for all other's?
Others have made the same statement... That statement dies not only apply to the McCann case
-
That's a very pertinent point.. We know Grime used the video from PDL to secure his lucrative contract in Jersey
I’ve never seen a cite for that. Do you have one ?
-
I’ve never seen a cite for that. Do you have one ?
Yes I've seen it... It described how Lenny Harper was impressed by the video... No time to dig it out at the moment
-
I’ve never seen a cite for that. Do you have one ?
Cite Not Required. We all know that the video was used to impress Lenny Harper.
-
Cite Not Required. We all know that the video was used to impress Lenny Harper.
Quote
Grime made a presentation, showing him [Harper] a video of the dog finding the "scent of death" in Kate and Gerry McCann's car,' the detective said.
'They were still formal suspects and the case had got worldwide publicity. It seemed to get Lenny very excited. I think Grime kind of bewitched him.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1217863/Bungled-Jersey-child-abuse-probe-branded-20million-shambles.html
-
Cite Not Required. We all know that the video was used to impress Lenny Harper.
Cite is required. Not a mod’s job to let posters ignore the rules.
-
Cite is required. Not a mod’s job to let posters ignore the rules.
Cite already given... It shows grime actively marketing his services...
-
Cite is required. Not a mod’s job to let posters ignore the rules.
Is a cite required for everything? Like if I wrote “cadaver dog alerted in the apartment “ would I have to provide a cite?
-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1217863/Bungled-Jersey-child-abuse-probe-branded-20million-shambles.html
Thank you, I had heard the claim bandied about the board but had never seen any verification.
-
Cite is required. Not a mod’s job to let posters ignore the rules.
I wish this rule was enforced more rigidly.. Many posters including mods, simply ignore it
-
I wish this rule was enforced more rigidly.. Many posters including mods, simply ignore it
Yes, SIL can write something contentious then say don’t ask for a cite and that seems perfectly acceptable.
-
Is a cite required for everything? Like if I wrote “cadaver dog alerted in the apartment “ would I have to provide a cite?
Wad it only yesterday rob claimed bones found under the coconut and failed to provide a cite
-
Quote
Grime made a presentation, showing him [Harper] a video of the dog finding the "scent of death" in Kate and Gerry McCann's car,' the detective said.
'They were still formal suspects and the case had got worldwide publicity. It seemed to get Lenny very excited. I think Grime kind of bewitched him.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1217863/Bungled-Jersey-child-abuse-probe-branded-20million-shambles.html
Nevertheless, Thank You, Davel.
-
Cite is required. Not a mod’s job to let posters ignore the rules.
You seem to manage.
-
Nevertheless, Thank You, Davel.
I actually provide more cites than almost every other poster.. I'm happy to abide by the rules but would like to see then applied equally to all... As they are not at present
-
How could alerts that have no evidential value be admitted as evidence.... IMO the defence was not aware of that statement
In 2007 yes but that situation could change if corroboration is ever found in the form of a body.
-
In 2007 yes but that situation could change if corroboration is ever found in the form of a body.
Everything could change if a body or other evidence is found..
-
The problem with admitting Grimed evidence is that if it was found the judge misunderstood Grimes claims it could result in a mistrial and Lane going free.. What a victory fir the dogs that would be
-
The problem with admitting Grimed evidence is that if it was found the judge misunderstood Grimes claims it could result in a mistrial and Lane going free.. What a victory fir the dogs that would be
But that didn’t happen as Grime, and the judge, presented the evidence and let the jury decide.
Have you watched the programme yet ? Grime is very clear about the dog’s capabilities and role in court proceedings.
Btw you still haven’t answered this question ‘So what is the ‘little’ they do have in common, IYO ?‘ about what links the two cases.
-
How could alerts that have no evidential value be admitted as evidence.... IMO the defence was not aware of that statement
IMO if Bianca Jones' DNA was found in the same location as the dog alerted MG would consider that as confirmation.
"confirmed by the finding of DNA etc ..."
Does that mean Bianca is dead? No I don't think it does. https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/defenders/witnesses-say-baby-ruled-dead-in-father-s-murder-trial-6-years-ago-is-still-alive That would be a weird one.
-
But that didn’t happen as Grime, and the judge, presented the evidence and let the jury decide.
Have you watched the programme yet ? Grime is very clear about the dog’s capabilities and role in court proceedings.
Btw you still haven’t answered this question ‘So what is the ‘little’ they do have in common, IYO ?‘ about what links the two cases.
The little they have in common is obvious...and what they don't have in common is obvious
According to the paper grime told the judge the dog had never had a false positive... Was this told to the jury too
Do you have a link to the video I'm interested
-
IMO if Bianca Jones' DNA was found in the same location as the dog alerted MG would consider that as confirmation.
"confirmed by the finding of DNA etc ..."
Does that mean Bianca is dead? No I don't think it does. https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/defenders/witnesses-say-baby-ruled-dead-in-father-s-murder-trial-6-years-ago-is-still-alive That would be a weird one.
I'm not sure if the DNa remark applies to the CSI dog... It's in his 189 page white paper which I've skim read
Obviously finding the girls DNA in the car does not confirm death. I think we should not take all of Grimes claims literally without clarification. Obviously if a cadaver dog alerted to an apartment where Maddie had never known to have been and her DNA was found there that would be more indicative
-
The problem with admitting Grimed evidence is that if it was found the judge misunderstood Grimes claims it could result in a mistrial and Lane going free.. What a victory fir the dogs that would be
I understand where you are comming from Davel, but the judge did not misunderstand anything, It was a jury decision based on what they saw and the witness statement of the 8 year old girl. a lot of circumstancial evidence made it difficult to not find that ratfaced 'father' guilty.
-
I'm not sure if the DNa remark applies to the CSI dog... It's in his 189 page white paper which I've skim read
Obviously finding the girls DNA in the car does not confirm death. I think we should not take all of Grimes claims literally without clarification. Obviously if a cadaver dog alerted to an apartment where Maddie had never known to have been and her DNA was found there that would be more indicative
Was Morse on his own in the US? Was he part of a combination of Cadaver dog plus a CSI dog?
For sure the Jury may have it wrong, but it wouldn't be the first case of wrongful conviction, but if Bianca is alive find her. That will be the sort of evidence needed to over turn the conviction.
-
I understand where you are comming from Davel, but the judge did not misunderstand anything, It was a jury decision based on what they saw and the witness statement of the 8 year old girl. a lot of circumstancial evidence made it difficult to not find that ratfaced 'father' guilty.
I agree with much of what you say... But judges have to be careful not prejudicing a trial by allowing inadmissible evidence... That could allow a guilty person to walk free
-
Was Morse on his own in the US? Was he part of a combination of Cadaver dog plus a CSI dog?
For sure the Jury may have it wrong, but it wouldn't be the first case of wrongful conviction, but if Bianca is alive find her. That will be the sort of evidence needed to over turn the conviction.
If it was decided at a later date Grimes evidence should not have been admitted a mistrial could be declared... That could mean a guilty man walking free due to grime and his dog
-
Grime has presented those alerts as evidence when he has previously said the alerts have no evidential value..
I doubt Lanes attorney is, aware of that
-
The little they have in common is obvious...and what they don't have in common is obvious
According to the paper grime told the judge the dog had never had a false positive... Was this told to the jury too
Do you have a link to the video I'm interested
It’s Netflix. Do you have a subscription?
-
Grime has presented those alerts as evidence when he has previously said the alerts have no evidential value..
I doubt Lanes attorney is, aware of that
Unless you have word of word what was said in court, i.e the court transcript, I think you are libelling Martin Grime and hence bringing the forum into disrepute.
-
If it was decided at a later date Grimes evidence should not have been admitted a mistrial could be declared... That could mean a guilty man walking free due to grime and his dog
That is a very good point. I am wary of that myself.
However , in this instance Grime does not say the cadaver scent belongs to anyone.only that the dog did alert to scent. Amazingly, directly at a car in a compound of many cars. And it was part of 'circumstancial evidence' which was collated. Hence why he was found guilty.
-
If it was decided at a later date Grimes evidence should not have been admitted a mistrial could be declared... That could mean a guilty man walking free due to grime and his dog
If it was declared a mistrial, wouldn't they have another trial and present the evidence correctly. If there is not enough evidence to convict him, he would be found not guilty as per the law.
-
Unless you have word of word what was said in court, i.e the court transcript, I think you are libelling Martin Grime and hence bringing the forum into disrepute.
In his white paper.. Jan 18...grime says again uncorroborated alerts should not be accepted as evidence.. Everything I'm saying is factual
-
If it was declared a mistrial, wouldn't they have another trial and present the evidence correctly. If there is not enough evidence to convict him, he would be found not guilty as per the law.
A new trial us a possibility but it cod be argued that due to all the adverse publicity he would not get a fair trial... So he would walk free
-
Following the evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied Lane's motion to exclude the cadaver dog evidence. At trial, the trial court instructed the jury to consider the cadaver dog evidence carefully and not to convict Lane solely on the basis of that evidence.
So I would think the judge is well aware of the dogs ability's.
-
In his white paper.. Jan 18...grime says again uncorroborated alerts should not be accepted as evidence.. Everything I'm saying is factual
Therefore we have to assume in the absence of the court transcript that Grime was satisfied the alert was corroborated.
-
Therefore we have to assume in the absence of the court transcript that Grime was satisfied the alert was corroborated.
We have the appeal hearing.
Grime submitted Morse and Keela's training reports into evidence. Over the course of 49 tests, Morse gave no false negative or false positive responses to tests in controlled environments. He gave one “unexplained” response, which was a single bark in a “blank” room. Morse scored 100 percent in tests on December 2 and December 6, 2011. Morse was tested on variety of dates between January 21, 2011, and February 13, 2013. Morse scored 100 percent in all but one test, on which he scored 95 to 100 percent. Morse did not give false positive responses to animal remains during his tests.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html
-
OK that seems to answer a previous question I asked if there was a team of dogs. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10842.msg540677#msg540677
In the retrial Martin Grime would not be mentioning Keela unless Keela was involved in locating the corroborating evidence. Morse alerts, then Keela finds a spot of blood, from which DNA confirms the blood came from Bianca.
-
It’s Netflix. Do you have a subscription?
Yes
-
It’s Netflix. Do you have a subscription?
The name of the series again? Exhibit A as in the title of the thread - Exhibit A and the Trial of D'Andre Lane.
-
OK that seems to answer a previous question I asked if there was a team of dogs. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10842.msg540677#msg540677
In the retrial Martin Grime would not be mentioning Keela unless Keela was involved in locating the corroborating evidence. Morse alerts, then Keela finds a spot of blood, from which DNA confirms the blood came from Bianca.
he didn't mention keela... No one did... I said his remark Re DNA was Re the CSI dig... As I remember from his white paper
-
They were obviously used in Portugal, the case above in US and someone cited a case in Scotland.
Why S.Yorks?
Think - number of deployments * experience of handler * capability of dog.
Number of deployments. The number of times a cadaver dog is of benefit. The dogs do not cover vast swathes of territory, hoping to perchance upon a cadaver. Police intelligence leads to a relatively small area to search.
Experience of handler. The officer is taken off other duties to become a full time handler. That is a costly resource.
Capability of dog. The vast majority of police dogs are not cadaver dogs. For example, tracker dogs are much more common, because they are needed much more frequently.
Most forces borrow 'specialist' dogs from any force which has them, rather than train their own.
From memory, didn't Tito and Muzzy belong to S Wales Police? Those were the dogs deployed in Luz in June 2014. I have reason to suspect one of those was deployed in Dec 2014 in a car search.
-
He didn't mention keela... No one did... I said his remark Re DNA was Re the CSI dig... As I remember from his white paper
Keela is his CSI dog.
-
Therefore we have to assume in the absence of the court transcript that Grime was satisfied the alert was corroborated.
You can assume what you like... We have no confirmation of corroboration... I don't think they were... I think based on what I've read the evidence should have been ruled inadmissible
-
Keela is his CSI dog.
The white paper refers to detection dogs in general
-
The white paper refers to detection dogs in general
I don't care TBH. Grime works his dogs as a team. the cadaver dog goes first and locates a region. The CSI dog follows up and locates a spot for forensic examination.
Together he might refer to them as "detection dogs". Seems reasonable to me.
-
I don't care TBH. Grime works his dogs as a team. the cadaver dog goes first and locates a region. The CSI dog follows up and locates a spot for forensic examination.
Together he might refer to them as "detection dogs". Seems reasonable to me.
No mention of a CSI dog in the lane case
-
No mention of a CSI dog in the lane case
But there was mention of Keela who is the CSI dog in the appeal case transcript.
-
But there was mention of Keela who is the CSI dog in the appeal case transcript.
Cite
-
Cite
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10842.msg540711#msg540711
-
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10842.msg540711#msg540711
It does say keela was there but made no alerts so not relevant
-
A new trial us a possibility but it cod be argued that due to all the adverse publicity he would not get a fair trial... So he would walk free
That wouldn’t happen...and it didn’t. In fact the only person I know to question Grime’s testimony is you.
-
That wouldn’t happen...and it didn’t. In fact the only person I know to question Grime’s testimony is you.
It could happen... I haven't questioned Grimes testimony.. Grimes testimony to the court is accurate... So that's two things you've got wrong
-
It could happen... I haven't questioned Grimes testimony.. Grimes testimony to the court is accurate... So that's two things you've got wrong
And aliens may invade one day but it hasn’t happened yet and is not likely to and glad you aren’t questioning Grime’s very professional appearance in court.
-
And aliens may invade one day but it hasn’t happened yet and is not likely to and glad you aren’t questioning Grime’s very professional appearance in court.
Im questioning his claim that morse has never had a false positive alert...he didnt make that to the court...according to the newsapers....he made it to the judge.. I think its misleading
-
IMO if Bianca Jones' DNA was found in the same location as the dog alerted MG would consider that as confirmation.
"confirmed by the finding of DNA etc ..."
Does that mean Bianca is dead? No I don't think it does. https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/defenders/witnesses-say-baby-ruled-dead-in-father-s-murder-trial-6-years-ago-is-still-alive That would be a weird one.
according to grime DNA can be used to confirm the finding of human remains or blood...not residual scent...its in his white paper
-
Im questioning his claim that morse has never had a false positive alert...he didnt make that to the court...according to the newsapers....he made it to the judge.. I think its misleading
According to the newspapers ? Do you have a cite ?
Btw that looks very much like questioning his testimony to me.
-
According to the newspapers ? Do you have a cite ?
Btw that looks very much like questioning his testimony to me.
i do...its on this thread...ive supplied it before...untl miss provides her cite you'll have to wait...the difference is...she cant... i can...lets see if any mod demands a cite from me but not from miss
-
i do...its on this thread...ive supplied it before...untl miss provides her cite you'll have to wait...the difference is...she cant... i can...lets see if any mod demands a cite from me but not from miss
Your argument with another poster has nothing to do with me. Are you trying to avoid providing a cite, again ?
-
Your argument with another poster has nothing to do with me. Are you trying to avoid providing a cite, again ?
It has everything to do with the debate...try to see the bigger picture...
-
According to the newspapers ? Do you have a cite ?
Btw that looks very much like questioning his testimony to me.
it certainly confused amaral
-
It has everything to do with the debate...try to see the bigger picture...
I’m not interested in the bigger picture. I’m interested in you providing a cite re Grime’s statement to the judge.
-
it certainly confused amaral
Took your time,99 post's and its Amarals fault.
-
I’m not interested in the bigger picture. I’m interested in you providing a cite re Grime’s statement to the judge.
im interested in the bigger picture and the good of the forum...you should thank me for it
-
Took your time,99 post's and its Amarals fault.
where did I say it was amarals fault...cite
-
im interested in the bigger picture and the good of the forum...you should thank me for it
For allowing it to keep going? 8(>((
-
For allowing it to keep going? 8(>((
for trying to get more balance
-
im interested in the bigger picture and the good of the forum...you should thank me for it
You’ve got yourself into a bind.....again...and are making excuses....again.
You really have no idea how foolish you appear, do you ? I really can’t decide which of the two Ds you remind me of most ......Donald Trump or David Brent.
-
You’ve got yourself into a bind.....again...and are making excuses....again.
You really have no idea how foolish you appear, do you ? I really can’t decide which of the two Ds you remind me of most ......Donald Trump or David Brent.
I dont consider you a good judge of anything so it doesnt really matter which you choose....waht did angelo say about goading
-
You’ve got yourself into a bind.....again...and are making excuses....again.
You really have no idea how foolish you appear, do you ? I really can’t decide which of the two Ds you remind me of most ......Donald Trump or David Brent.
good to see you catching on with the elipses
-
I dont consider you a good judge of anything so it doesnt really matter which you choose....waht did angelo say about goading
on this forum I see myself as more David....and Goliath
-
I dont consider you a good judge of anything so it doesnt really matter which you choose....waht did angelo say about goading
You think it’s just me who feels that way ?
-
You think it’s just me who feels that way ?
not at all...I think most sceptics here resent my presence and opinions on the forum and feel the same as you...strange how the supporters view me totally differently...
-
not at all...I think most sceptics here resent my presence and opinions on the forum and feel the same as you...strange how the supporters view me totally differently...
Do they....or are they just less vocal about their feelings ?
-
Do they....or are they just less vocal about their feelings ?
no they are very vocal...I find it a little naieve of you not to understand that your...and others...view of me is totally coloured by the fact that Im supportive of the McCanns innocence....it really is that simple
-
You’ve got yourself into a bind.....again...and are making excuses....again.
You really have no idea how foolish you appear, do you ? I really can’t decide which of the two Ds you remind me of most ......Donald Trump or David Brent.
Have you ever considered that you appear foolish.....why do you find it necessary to continually post ad hom towards me...I see it as a weakness in your personality...im not at all offended by it
-
no they are very vocal...I find it a little naieve of you not to understand that your...and others...view of me is totally coloured by the fact that Im supportive of the McCanns innocence....it really is that simple
Not at all. I find Eleanor very affable and someone I have the greatest respect for...despite our earlier troubles...and there is no one more supportive of the McCanns than Eleanor.
-
Not at all. I find Eleanor very affable and someone I have the greatest respect for...despite our earlier troubles...and there is no one more supportive of the McCanns than Eleanor.
sorry...your excuse doesnt wash...the title of the thread is ...Exhibit A and the Trial of D'Andre Lane....why do you feel the need to make continual ad hom towards me..its a rhetorical question...I already know the answer
-
sorry...your excuse doesnt wash
And again you’ve succeeded in moving further and further away from the cite you were asked for...so here it is again.
Do you have a cite for the statement you made re Grime’s claims to the judge in the Lane case ?
-
And again you’ve succeeded in moving further and further away from the cite you were asked for...so here it is again.
Do you have a cite for the statement you made re Grime’s claims to the judge in the Lane case ?
I refer you to my previous answer
-
I refer you to my previous answer
You don’t have one, do you ? You simply made it up.
-
You don’t have one, do you ? You simply made it up.
I refer you to my previous answer
-
Not at all. I find Eleanor very affable and someone I have the greatest respect for...despite our earlier troubles...and there is no one more supportive of the McCanns than Eleanor.
Ah well, as you said, I don't bear grudges. And I don't suppose that you do either. I actually like you whatever you may say.
-
Ah well, as you said, I don't bear grudges. And I don't suppose that you do either. I actually like you whatever you may say.
I like Faith too, I think shes’s a really lovely person, and her loveliness shines though on this forum for all to see.
-
It does say keela was there but made no alerts so not relevant
Did you have the energy to read that link and from that you deduced that Keela did not alert. If that is the case that is a bit strange.
-
I like Faith too, I think shes’s a really lovely person, and her loveliness shines though on this forum for all to see.
Thanks VS. Unfortunately the feeling isn’t reciprocated.
-
Did you have the energy to read that link and from that you deduced that Keela did not alert. If that is the case that is a bit strange.
I didn't deduce anything.. It's in the report that keela did not alert to the car
-
Thanks VS. Unfortunately the feeling isn’t reciprocated.
That’s OK, I know you really, really dislike me, I can live with that. 8**8:/:
-
That’s OK, I know you really, really dislike me, I can live with that. 8**8:/:
I don’t actually.
-
Thanks VS. Unfortunately the feeling isn’t reciprocated.
Did you have to say that.? I am really trying here. Snort.
-
It does say keela was there but made no alerts so not relevant
"According to Grime, on December 4, 2011, he took his dogs to an enclosed warehouse that contained 31 vehicles. Grime was told that Bianca was in one of the vehicles at the time of the carjacking, but was not told which vehicle was involved. Morse alerted Grime to the presence of the odor of decomposition in the back seat and trunk of a silver Grand Marquis. Keela later screened the car and did not alert Grime to the presence of human blood.
Grime testified that, after the vehicle screening, he took the dogs to an administrative building to screen the items removed from Dungey's car. Grime did not know where the objects were located in the building, and the objects had been placed in a room filled with “all sorts of things.” Morse alerted Grime to the odor of decomposition in Bianca's car seat and a bag containing Bianca's blanket. Grime later took the dogs to Dungey's house. Morse https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.htmlalerted him to the odor of decomposition in a room that contained bunk beds and a closet without a door."
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html
OK Keela did not alert to blood on the car seat or blanket. Where did Grime go wrong then?
-
"According to Grime, on December 4, 2011, he took his dogs to an enclosed warehouse that contained 31 vehicles. Grime was told that Bianca was in one of the vehicles at the time of the carjacking, but was not told which vehicle was involved. Morse alerted Grime to the presence of the odor of decomposition in the back seat and trunk of a silver Grand Marquis. Keela later screened the car and did not alert Grime to the presence of human blood.
Grime testified that, after the vehicle screening, he took the dogs to an administrative building to screen the items removed from Dungey's car. Grime did not know where the objects were located in the building, and the objects had been placed in a room filled with “all sorts of things.” Morse alerted Grime to the odor of decomposition in Bianca's car seat and a bag containing Bianca's blanket. Grime later took the dogs to Dungey's house. Morse https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.htmlalerted him to the odor of decomposition in a room that contained bunk beds and a closet without a door."
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html
OK Keela did not alert to blood on the car seat or blanket. Where did Grime go wrong then?
Do you intend to deal with the goading towards me
-
I’m not interested in the bigger picture. I’m interested in you providing a cite re Grime’s statement to the judge.
So am I. Where did you deduce that from Davel?
-
You were right Keela did not alert, so we have an uncorroborated cadaver dog alert. Now tell us how you know that MG spoke to the judge (was that privately)? I'll let you tell the story.
-
Claptrap... You have no problem deleting my posts...
Are you talking about last week or just now, in the last 2 hours? I haven't deleted any posts today.
-
"According to Grime, on December 4, 2011, he took his dogs to an enclosed warehouse that contained 31 vehicles. Grime was told that Bianca was in one of the vehicles at the time of the carjacking, but was not told which vehicle was involved. Morse alerted Grime to the presence of the odor of decomposition in the back seat and trunk of a silver Grand Marquis. Keela later screened the car and did not alert Grime to the presence of human blood.
Grime testified that, after the vehicle screening, he took the dogs to an administrative building to screen the items removed from Dungey's car. Grime did not know where the objects were located in the building, and the objects had been placed in a room filled with “all sorts of things.” Morse alerted Grime to the odor of decomposition in Bianca's car seat and a bag containing Bianca's blanket. Grime later took the dogs to Dungey's house. Morse https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.htmlalerted him to the odor of decomposition in a room that contained bunk beds and a closet without a door."
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html
OK Keela did not alert to blood on the car seat or blanket. Where did Grime go wrong then?
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id421.htm
Expert testifies that cadaver dog gave signals about toddler in D'Andre Lane's car, house Detroit Free Press
Bianca Jones
Bianca Jones
October 4, 2012
snipped
Local investigators took Grime and Morse, who is trained to detect decomposing human remains, to an enclosed garage at the Detroit Police Department's impound lot. Inside, he released Morse, leading him through a maze of 31 parked cars, including Lane's silver Mercury.
"He went underneath Mr. Lane's car then came out and barked ... like woof-woof-woof-woof-woof-woof-woof," Grime said, adding that he wasn't told that the silver Mercury was Lane's until after the search was complete.
"What was the response what you opened the door and the trunk, sir?" Assistant Prosecutor Carin Goldfarb asked.
"There was a positive response -- the dog barked continuously," he said, adding that the dog didn't bark at any other cars.
He said they then went to a Detroit Police Department evidence room, where investigators wrapped Bianca's car seat in brown paper and hid it in an office within a number of rooms.
Grime said there was no response during the first search, when the car seat was sealed inside the brown paper. He then asked officers to put a slit in the paper and move the car seat to another room.
"The second time, when the dog got close to the package, he put his nose in the package and gave a positive response," Grime said.
Investigators then set up a search in another warehouse using Bianca's blanket that had been in the car seat. Grime said the dog barked when it came across a brown paper bag on the floor with the blanket inside.
"Were you aware of where any of these items were going to be when Morse signaled on them?" Goldfarb asked.
"No," Grime said, adding that he can't force the dog to bark continuously and he never saw the actual car seat or blanket.
Grime said he then took Morse to Lane's house, where Morse sat and barked in Bianca's bedroom, close to the opening of a door-less closet.
"Have the results you've come up with ever been contradicted?" Judge Vonda Evans asked. He said no.
But Lane's attorney, Terry Johnson, raised questions about the dog's ability to detect decomposition during his cross-examination.
"You have no way of telling what Morse responded to at any location?" Johnson asked Grime.
"He gave us a positive response," Morse said. "The corroboration would normally be to find a cadaver or bone or blood that you can see."
"The dog did not give a positive response to the clothing worn by Mr. Lane, correct?" Johnson asked.
"No," Grime said.
===================================================================
Why did Grime ask for a concealed item, not alerted to by Morse on first examination, to be moved for a second test whilst claiming afterwards he didn't know what the concealed item was?
-
Are you talking about last week or just now, in the last 2 hours? I haven't deleted any posts today.
To all members:
I'm telling you how to make our moderator job easier, so in the end we can be more effective. Like if you report a post even then we don't know anything about that till we check our emails.
But that would be best is to report it and not reply to the reported post, but just to keep on to the thread's topic.
-
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id421.htm
Expert testifies that cadaver dog gave signals about toddler in D'Andre Lane's car, house Detroit Free Press
Bianca Jones
Bianca Jones
October 4, 2012
snipped
Local investigators took Grime and Morse, who is trained to detect decomposing human remains, to an enclosed garage at the Detroit Police Department's impound lot. Inside, he released Morse, leading him through a maze of 31 parked cars, including Lane's silver Mercury.
"He went underneath Mr. Lane's car then came out and barked ... like woof-woof-woof-woof-woof-woof-woof," Grime said, adding that he wasn't told that the silver Mercury was Lane's until after the search was complete.
"What was the response what you opened the door and the trunk, sir?" Assistant Prosecutor Carin Goldfarb asked.
"There was a positive response -- the dog barked continuously," he said, adding that the dog didn't bark at any other cars.
He said they then went to a Detroit Police Department evidence room, where investigators wrapped Bianca's car seat in brown paper and hid it in an office within a number of rooms.
Grime said there was no response during the first search, when the car seat was sealed inside the brown paper. He then asked officers to put a slit in the paper and move the car seat to another room.
"The second time, when the dog got close to the package, he put his nose in the package and gave a positive response," Grime said.
Investigators then set up a search in another warehouse using Bianca's blanket that had been in the car seat. Grime said the dog barked when it came across a brown paper bag on the floor with the blanket inside.
"Were you aware of where any of these items were going to be when Morse signaled on them?" Goldfarb asked.
"No," Grime said, adding that he can't force the dog to bark continuously and he never saw the actual car seat or blanket.
Grime said he then took Morse to Lane's house, where Morse sat and barked in Bianca's bedroom, close to the opening of a door-less closet.
"Have the results you've come up with ever been contradicted?" Judge Vonda Evans asked. He said no.
But Lane's attorney, Terry Johnson, raised questions about the dog's ability to detect decomposition during his cross-examination.
"You have no way of telling what Morse responded to at any location?" Johnson asked Grime.
"He gave us a positive response," Morse said. "The corroboration would normally be to find a cadaver or bone or blood that you can see."
"The dog did not give a positive response to the clothing worn by Mr. Lane, correct?" Johnson asked.
"No," Grime said.
===================================================================
Why did Grime ask for a concealed item, not alerted to by Morse on first examination, to be moved for a second test whilst claiming afterwards he didn't know what the concealed item was?
The funniest bit, if there can ever be anything funny about the murder of a little girl, is this line in that article:
""He gave us a positive response," Morse said. "The corroboration would normally be to find a cadaver or bone or blood that you can see."
Morse is the dog so I wonder how he told the reporter that?
-
It's a shame we can't have a grown up discussion... From what I can see in the lane case... Grime considers the alerts corroborated.... Hes moved the goalposts
-
It's a shame we can't have a grown up discussion... From what I can see in the lane case... Grime considers the alerts corroborated.... Hes moved the goalposts
Grime said Morse alerted to what he was trained to, that is all.
-
Grime said Morse alerted to what he was trained to, that is all.
grime has said a lot more than that...hes moved the goalposts...hes written a 180 page white paper with his latest thoughts...read it and you will be in a position to comment
-
grime has said a lot more than that...hes moved the goalposts...hes written a 180 page white paper with his latest thoughts...read it and you will be in a position to comment
We are talking about this case.
-
We are talking about this case.
it is extremely relevant to this case
-
it is extremely relevant to this case
Do you have a link to the white paper ?
-
Do you have a link to the white paper ?
It's freely available, so I've provided a link.
http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/ (http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/)
-
It's freely available, so I've provided a link.
http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/ (http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/)
Here's a link to the whole paper.
http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/1/Forensic%20Canine%20Foundation%20.pdf
-
It's freely available, so I've provided a link.
http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/ (http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/)
It raises many.. Many questions.
One is Grime is now, saying that cadaver dogs do not react to teeth unless they have been recently lost. Extracted teeth may have remnants of connective tissue bone and blood attached.
The teeth in Jersey were, reported, as being naturally shed so this wouldnt apply
Eddie alerted 11times in Jersey... To a coconut...which is discounted... Baby teeth... Which can be discounted... And we are left with sone bone fragments that MAY be human
Lanes, attorney raised the coconut question, Grime replied his dog is not always, right.... It actually seems he, was never right in Jersey
-
It's freely available, so I've provided a link.
http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/ (http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/)
From your link..
.
Since then we have conducted research and developed doctrine and methodology based upon published scientific proof of concept. Our success has continued, and the use of this type of detection has been included within judicial process where prosecutors have thought it appropriate within the laws of the country or State.
Has any of this research been published or made public... Where is it ...grime is making claims here... Does he have anything to support it.... Or is it more anecdotal... Not scientific... research
-
It's freely available, so I've provided a link.
http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/ (http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/)
Thanks.
-
Here's a link to the whole paper.
http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/1/Forensic%20Canine%20Foundation%20.pdf
Thanks.
-
It raises many.. Many questions.
One is Grime is now, saying that cadaver dogs do not react to teeth unless they have been recently lost. Extracted teeth may have remnants of connective tissue bone and blood attached.
The teeth in Jersey were, reported, as being naturally shed so this wouldnt apply
Eddie alerted 11times in Jersey... To a coconut...which is discounted... Baby teeth... Which can be discounted... And we are left with sone bone fragments that MAY be human
Lanes, attorney raised the coconut question, Grime replied his dog is not always, right.... It actually seems he, was never right in Jersey
Funny, I read it with a balanced viewpoint and reached a different conclusion. Confirmation bias is a funny thing.
Bottom line for me remains: would I use Grime / Morse if I was in the unfortunate position of needing them? Yes.
-
From your link..
.
Since then we have conducted research and developed doctrine and methodology based upon published scientific proof of concept. Our success has continued, and the use of this type of detection has been included within judicial process where prosecutors have thought it appropriate within the laws of the country or State.
Has any of this research been published or made public... Where is it ...grime is making claims here... Does he have anything to support it.... Or is it more anecdotal... Not scientific... research
It's not my link. I had nothing to do with it.
-
Funny, I read it with a balanced viewpoint and reached a different conclusion. Confirmation bias is a funny thing.
Bottom line for me remains: would I use Grime / Morse if I was in the unfortunate position of needing them? Yes.
You may not be as balanced as you think... Could you.. From a balanced point of view... Point out any errors in my logic Re the teeth question rather than just making insinuations.
If I needed a cadaver dog I would be happy to use Morse and grime... You miss my point
-
You may not be as balanced as you think... Could you.. From a balanced point of view... Point out any errors in my logic Re the teeth question rather than just making insinuations.
If I needed a cadaver dog I would be happy to use Morse and grime... You miss my point
No. I'm not interested.
Your point is moot to me. I'm totally disinterested in picking apart reliability. If Morse was 62% accurate, I'd use him. If Martin said 'dig there', I'd dig there. Nothing there? Never mind, move on.
Do I want the security company at Canary Wharf to stop patrolling with sniffer dogs? Do I f***! I don't don't care if they're only even right half the time. I don't care. Disarticulated teeth, no arsed. The paper is an interesting read mind.
-
Funny, I read it with a balanced viewpoint and reached a different conclusion. Confirmation bias is a funny thing.
Bottom line for me remains: would I use Grime / Morse if I was in the unfortunate position of needing them? Yes.
You are a sceptic I have some respect fir but rather than hiding behind an accusation of bias... Could you provide the evidence thst supports your view
-
You are a sceptic I have some respect fir but rather than hiding behind an accusation of bias... Could you provide the evidence thst supports your view
You failed to detect the unintentional nuance in the sentence - I too was affected by confirmation bias, despite my apparent 'balanced view'. I don't think you can read such papers without preconceptions subconsciously clouding judgement.
-
You failed to detect the unintentional nuance in the sentence - I too was affected by confirmation bias, despite my apparent 'balanced view'. I don't think you can read such papers without preconceptions subconsciously clouding judgement.
You are clouding the issue... Why respond to my post if you don't address the point I have made.
My point is based on strong evidence... Confirmation bias doesn't feature
-
No. I'm not interested.
Your point is moot to me. I'm totally disinterested in picking apart reliability. If Morse was 62% accurate, I'd use him. If Martin said 'dig there', I'd dig there. Nothing there? Never mind, move on.
Do I want the security company at Canary Wharf to stop patrolling with sniffer dogs? Do I f***! I don't don't care if they're only even right half the time. I don't care. Disarticulated teeth, no arsed. The paper is an interesting read mind.
What about if the sniffer dog signals you are carrying explosives... And the police decided to shoot you dead on their say do.. Would you be bothered then
-
What about if the sniffer dog signsllef you erte carrying explosives... And the police decided to shoot you dead on their say do.. Would you be bothered then
No. I'd be dead.
-
No. I'd be dead.
My General, you do brighten up my day.
-
No. I'm not interested.
Your point is moot to me. I'm totally disinterested in picking apart reliability. If Morse was 62% accurate, I'd use him. If Martin said 'dig there', I'd dig there. Nothing there? Never mind, move on.
Do I want the security company at Canary Wharf to stop patrolling with sniffer dogs? Do I f***! I don't don't care if they're only even right half the time. I don't care. Disarticulated teeth, no arsed. The paper is an interesting read mind.
This thread is re the lane trial... The reliability of the dogs was, a big issue in the trial. If you aren't interested fine... But then don't disrupt the thread
-
It's a shame we can't have a grown up discussion... From what I can see in the lane case... Grime considers the alerts corroborated.... Hes moved the goalposts
He is quoted as saying "he gave us a positive response" well that isn't what I'd expect as corroboration.
-
grime has said a lot more than that...hes moved the goalposts...hes written a 180 page white paper with his latest thoughts...read it and you will be in a position to comment
Where is that document Davel? http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/ or http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/1/Forensic%20Canine%20Foundation%20.pdf
-
No. I'd be dead.
You hope!
-
Where is that document Davel?
The link has been quoted this morning by gunit..
It makes very interesting reading ...very interesting reading..
Problem is it's about 180 pages..
-
He is quoted as saying "he gave us a positive response" well that isn't what I'd expect as corroboration.
As I've Saud grime has moved the goalpost significantly... It's all in the document.
DNA confirms remains IR blood... But not residual scent... It's all their... I'm quite good at reading and understanding long documents quickly but I wonder how others, will fair.
It raises some really interesting questions... First being grime says only fresh teeth would cause an alert which destroys the claim Re the baby... Deciduous.. Teeth found in jersey
-
Moderation
I have this morning 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. Posters who continue to flaunt the rules despite this warning will be subject to a ban without further notice.
-
As I've Saud grime has moved the goalpost significantly... It's all in the document.
DNA confirms remains IR blood... But not residual scent... It's all their... I'm quite good at reading and understanding long documents quickly but I wonder how others, will fair.
It raises some really interesting questions... First being grime says only fresh teeth would cause an alert which destroys the claim Re the baby... Deciduous.. Teeth found in jersey
Could you please explain DNA confirms remains IR blood?
-
Could you please explain DNA confirms remains IR blood?
DNA confirms remains and blood... Not residual scent.. Its in the white paper
It should read DNA or blood.. The I is next to the o on my phone keyboard
-
DNA confirms remains and blood... Not residual scent.. Its in the white paper
Except in mixed samples - then they might be inconclusive.
-
Except in mixed samples - then they might be inconclusive.
I'm quoting grime
-
I'm quoting grime
I listened to a documentary that mentioned Perlin (??) who invented that new technique to sort out mixed samples and they were very positive about the results. Lost track of the title now.
-
I listened to a documentary that mentioned Perlin (??) who invented that new technique to sort out mixed samples and they were very positive about the results. Lost track of the title now.
I was aware of it before saunokonoko mentioned it.. True Allele
-
The question I would like answered is why Grime in the Lane case sees the alerts as evidential but in the McCann case not
-
The question I would like answered is why Grime in the Lane case sees the alerts as evidential but in the McCann case not
Funny you should say that, I've been thinking about just that.
Has anyone ever reached out to Martin? I wonder if he would be amenable to a conversation. I've found him on Linkedin, so it would be quite straightforward to ask.
-
Funny you should say that, I've been thinking about just that.
Has anyone ever reached out to Martin? I wonder if he would be amenable to a conversation. I've found him on Linkedin, so it would be quite straightforward to ask.
He isn't... He's, running a course soon for dog handlers, with the specific instructions not to ask questions Re the McCann case
-
Funny you should say that, I've been thinking about just that.
Has anyone ever reached out to Martin? I wonder if he would be amenable to a conversation. I've found him on Linkedin, so it would be quite straightforward to ask.
It's a very important question... No forensic confirmation in either case. If the alerts are significant in the Lane case they should be significant in the McCann case
-
He isn't... He's, running a course soon for dog handlers, with the specific instructions not to ask questions Re the McCann case
Fair one. He's probably sick to the hind teeth of being grilled.
-
He isn't... He's, running a course soon for dog handlers, with the specific instructions not to ask questions Re the McCann case
In keeping with the forum protocols can you cite for that claim please?
-
It's a very important question... No forensic confirmation in either case. If the alerts are significant in the Lane case they should be significant in the McCann case
They should be but different countries, different rules re admissible evidence.
-
In keeping with the forum protocols can you cite for that claim please?
I will try... It's probably on the forum... Sil saw it..as did I think gunit.....should be easy enough to find
-
They should be but different countries, different rules re admissible evidence.
I think the standards of admissibility would be similar... Would the alerts have been allowed if Lanes lawyer was better informed... I don't think they would
-
I think the standards of admissibility would be similar... Would the alerts have been allowed if Lanes lawyer was better informed... I don't think they would
Grime described Morse's reaction to the car seat as a "positive response". That is not just the bark but the handler's perception of the dog prior to , during and after the alert barking. It could be partially captured on video but it is the judgement of the handler, a judgement on the body language of the dog.
Through years of training that dog Grime would be able to tell when his dog has really found what he was trained to find. He would have a degree of confidence in his own ability in reading the dogs body language.
-
I think the standards of admissibility would be similar... Would the alerts have been allowed if Lanes lawyer was better informed... I don't think they would
If I were his lawyer I would have to accept the expert explanation of the alerts however, I would point out- the cadaver has no name on it i.e the dog alerted to cadaver in that area/s.
The proscecution and the jury in this particular case, had a lot of circumstancial evidence pointing to a reasonable account of the fate of the baby Bianca Jones and who the perpertrator is.
The judge explains this: https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/defenders/judge-vonda-evans-opens-up-about-bianca-jones-case-for-first-time
-
Grime described Morse's reaction to the car seat as a "positive response". That is not just the bark but the handler's perception of the dog prior to , during and after the alert barking. It could be partially captured on video but it is the judgement of the handler, a judgement on the body language of the dog.
Through years of training that dog Grime would be able to tell when his dog has really found what he was trained to find. He would have a degree of confidence in his own ability in reading the dogs body language.
That isnt good enough for the law...the law requires evidence. Grime is now trying to establish scientific validation for his alerts via scientific tests....it seems to me in the lane case that he claimed this is now what he has...I dont beleive he has...Im not a dog handler but i would say Im a nbetter scientist than Grime. If you read his white apper you will see what I m talking about
-
If I were his lawyer I would have to accept the expert explanation of the alerts however, I would point out- the cadaver has no name on it i.e the dog alerted to cadaver in that area/s.
The proscecution and the jury in this particular case, had a lot of circumstancial evidence pointing to a reasonable account of the fate of the baby Bianca Jones and who the perpertrator is.
The judge explains this: https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/defenders/judge-vonda-evans-opens-up-about-bianca-jones-case-for-first-time
I would not accept any explanation not backed by evidence...thats how science works anf grime wants to calim his dogs have scientific validation...I dont see that they do. His lawyer mentioned the coconut in Jersey...grime replied sometimes his dog was wrong. Eddie made 11 alerts in jersey...according to grime cadaver dogs do not react to teeth...it seems to me theres nothing to validate any of the alerts in jersey.
There is alot of evidence against lane....but i beleive the alerts should not have been admitted...i think the judge made a serious error
-
I would not accept any explanation not backed by evidence...thats how science works anf grime wants to calim his dogs have scientific validation...I dont see that they do. His lawyer mentioned the coconut in Jersey...grime replied sometimes his dog was wrong. Eddie made 11 alerts in jersey...according to grime cadaver dogs do not react to teeth...it seems to me theres nothing to validate any of the alerts in jersey.
There is alot of evidence against lane....but i beleive the alerts should not have been admitted...i think the judge made a serious error
We shall agree to disagree on some of your points.
-
That isnt good enough for the law...the law requires evidence. Grime is now trying to establish scientific validation for his alerts via scientific tests....it seems to me in the lane case that he claimed this is now what he has...I dont beleive he has...Im not a dog handler but i would say Im a nbetter scientist than Grime. If you read his white apper you will see what I m talking about
Is what Grime saw any different to a witness stating he saw the accused standing on the corner or where ever? Both are basically observations by a witness.
-
Is what Grime saw any different to a witness stating he saw the accused standing on the corner or where ever? Both are basically observations by a witness.
yes its vastly different..Grime saw an alert but he cant confirm scientifically what the alert was to
-
The question I would like answered is why Grime in the Lane case sees the alerts as evidential but in the McCann case not
Had Grime been called to give evidence about Eddie in the McCann case his evidence would have been no different to the evidence he gave about Morse in the Lane case imo.
-
Had Grime been called to give evidence about Eddie in the McCann case his evidence would have been no different to the evidence he gave about Morse in the Lane case imo.
I beleive in this case he claims Morse has been the subject of scientific tests..I dont see that they have...wheres the data....he has changed his stance....in the mccann case he said the alerts had no evidential reliability...he didnt say that this time..hes presenting them as evidence
-
yes its vastly different..Grime saw an alert but he cant confirm scientifically what the alert was to
If Gerry stated in court he saw Madeleine lying on the covers at 9:05, is there anyway that that claim can be confirmed scientifically? They are both reported observations.
-
If Gerry stated in court he saw Madeleine lying on the covers at 9:05, is there anyway that that claim can be confirmed scientifically? They are both reported observations.
as i said...so it can be accepted the dog alerted....but the question is why
-
as i said...so it can be accepted the dog alerted....but the question is why
Breaking it down...
The dogs are trained to alert to cadaver having been in a location.
If the dogs barks at every car or car seat then there is no reason to suppose all cars may have been in some form of accident where people lost lives, or suppose that the dog is just barking because it is hungry.
To place the dog in a compound with lots of cars and it only barks at one- that does speak volumes if it is the car which was used to transport baby Jones.
-
Breaking it down...
The dogs are trained to alert to cadaver having been in a location.
If the dogs barks at every car or car seat then there is no reason to suppose all cars may have been in some form of accident where people lost lives, or suppose that the dog is just barking because it is hungry.
To place the dog in a compound with lots of cars and it only barks at one- that does speak volumes if it is the car which was used to transport baby Jones.
how many of the cars in the compound had a child seat on the back seat..the dog failed to react to the seat when it was covered in paper and grime couldnt see it...but reacted to it later when grime was aware where it was and a slit cut in the paper...morse never reacted to lanes clothes
-
I think the standards of admissibility would be similar... Would the alerts have been allowed if Lanes lawyer was better informed... I don't think they would
Why ?
-
I beleive in this case he claims Morse has been the subject of scientific tests..I dont see that they have...wheres the data....he has changed his stance....in the mccann case he said the alerts had no evidential reliability...he didnt say that this time..hes presenting them as evidence
In the Lane case the prosecution decided they wanted to use Grime. The judge, after taking advice, agreed. The jury were convinced by all the evidence presented even though it was all circumstantial.
-
Why ?
because the attorney did not have enough knowledge to challenge Grime...he came up with the coconut...Grime answerred his dog was not always right...the attorney wasnt aware that the dog doesnt react to teeth ...which by grimes response invalidates almoest every alert in jersey///...stockam claimed a scientific programme and testing...i dont beleive there ahs been any scientific testing on the dogs...and more and more
-
In the Lane case the prosecution decided they wanted to use Grime. The judge, after taking advice, agreed. The jury were convinced by all the evidence presented even though it was all circumstantial.
I think the judge made a mistake...judges do
-
as i said...so it can be accepted the dog alerted....but the question is why
Grime didn't just claim his dog alerted but his dog gave a positive response. Does he define what a positive response is.
If it just a barking sound maybe you're right, but I'm picking it is the perceived confidence the dog had at the time of the barking alert.
-
Grime didn't just claim his dog alerted but his dog gave a positive response. Does he define what a positive response is.
If it just a barking sound maybe you're right, but I'm picking it is the perceived confidence the dog had at the time of the barking alert.
Grimes confidence is not enough to support what the dog alerted to...or it shouldnt be.....there should be proper evidence to support his calims. I believe in this case the court was convinced there was evidence...i dont see there was
-
I think the judge made a mistake...judges do
It doesn't really matter what you think though, does it?
-
It doesn't really matter what you think though, does it?
Im giving my opinion which is supported by evidence...perhaps Ill contact lanes attorney with my evidence and then what I think might matter...no evidential reliability is pretty clear
-
Im giving my opinion which is supported by evidence...perhaps Ill contact lanes attorney with my evidence and then what I think might matter...no evidential reliability is pretty clear
Lane appealed in 2014 but his attempts to get Grime's evidence ruled out didn't suceed.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html
-
Lane appealed in 2014 but his attempts to get Grime's evidence ruled out didn't suceed.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html
Well this bit is wrong for a start
"Tracking dogs and cadaver dogs both use a precise sense of smell to identify scents that are outside the range of human ability to detect"
Humans and dogs have the same ability to detect and identify scents. I read it on a very respected blog so it must be true.
-
Lane appealed in 2014 but his attempts to get Grime's evidence ruled out didn't suceed.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html
I know....but wonder just how much they knew about Grime and hs claims...I really think the judge was misled.........not intentionally ...but i think she beleived there was more evidence behind the alerts....that the 90% accuracy reflected alerts in general..thta morse had never had a false positive.and that they had some scientific validation
-
I know....but wonder just how much they knew about Grime and hs claims...I really think the judge was misled.........not intentionally ...but i think she beleived there was more evidence behind the alerts....that the 90% accuracy reflected alerts in general..thta morse had never had a false positive.and that they had some scientific validation
Does it never occur to you that it's you who are wrong, not Grime, Stockham or the judges of Mitchigan? Not to mention the judges of Portugal.
-
Does it never occur to you that it's you who are wrong, not Grime, Stockham or the judges of Mitchigan? Not to mention the judges of Portugal.
I've considered the evidence... And no... Grime might be a better dog trainer but I've a much better knowledge of scientific method.. Neither he nor Stockham seem to have a clue how to design a scientific study.. Yet that's what their claim to the judge included
-
I would not accept any explanation not backed by evidence...thats how science works anf grime wants to calim his dogs have scientific validation...I dont see that they do. His lawyer mentioned the coconut in Jersey...grime replied sometimes his dog was wrong. Eddie made 11 alerts in jersey...according to grime cadaver dogs do not react to teeth...it seems to me theres nothing to validate any of the alerts in jersey.
There is alot of evidence against lane....but i beleive the alerts should not have been admitted...i think the judge made a serious error
This is the correct quote from Martin Grime: 'People aren't right 100 per cent of the time. Otherwise they wouldn't be human.'
-
This is the correct quote from Martin Grime: 'People aren't right 100 per cent of the time. Otherwise they wouldn't be human.'
Was that from netflix
-
I've considered the evidence... And no... Grime might be a better dog trainer but I've a much better knowledge of scientific method.. Neither he nor Stockham seem to have a clue how to design a scientific study.. Yet that's what their claim to the judge included
Oh yes, I forgot that area of your expertise (sic). I think the judges examined everything with commendible rigour.
Stockham's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of dogs throughout their working lives...Stockham testified that he had tested Morse and Keela, Grime's dogs, and that both dogs had accuracy ratings in the high 90 percent range...
Grime submitted Morse and Keela's training reports into evidence. Over the course of 49 tests, Morse gave no false negative or false positive responses to tests in controlled environments. He gave one “unexplained” response, which was a single bark in a “blank” room. Morse scored 100 percent in tests on December 2 and December 6, 2011. Morse was tested on variety of dates between January 21, 2011, and February 13, 2013. Morse scored 100 percent in all but one test, on which he scored 95 to 100 percent. Morse did not give false positive responses to animal remains during his tests.
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/mi-court-of-appeals/1683760.html
-
Was that from netflix
No I haven't seen the netflix series.
-
No I haven't seen the netflix series.
Then you are currently operating 8 hours in the black*
*assuming your previous net wasted hours was zero
-
Interesting article
https://truecrimedaily.com/2017/09/20/motor-city-mystery-where-is-baby-bianca/
-
Well this bit is wrong for a start
"Tracking dogs and cadaver dogs both use a precise sense of smell to identify scents that are outside the range of human ability to detect"
Humans and dogs have the same ability to detect and identify scents. I read it on a very respected blog so it must be true.
We both have noses.
-
Interesting article
https://truecrimedaily.com/2017/09/20/motor-city-mystery-where-is-baby-bianca/
D'Andre tells me in an exclusive Crime Watch Daily telephone interview what he says he told investigators.
"I pulled over to the side to get out and check and see what was going on with the car," said D'Andre. "The car that blew the horn at me stopped behind me and a black male, got out, brandished a firearm and told me to get the f--- away from the car. I just remember pleading and asking with him to let me get my daughter out of the car. 'Let me get my baby out of the car.'
"The guy got in the car, drove off. I tried to run after him. I couldn't keep up with him," D'Andre said.
And D'Andre tells Crime Watch Daily a second man drove away in the carjacker's red sedan.
"The next thing that I remember was me getting to her mother's house," D'Andre said.
.............
Interesting, D'Andre apparently suffers an attack of global amnesia post car-jacking.
That'll be why he didn't call the police then, he just walked like a zombie to her mothers house.
Derion Vence suffered a similar affliction when he was car-jacked.
-
D'Andre tells me in an exclusive Crime Watch Daily telephone interview what he says he told investigators.
"I pulled over to the side to get out and check and see what was going on with the car," said D'Andre. "The car that blew the horn at me stopped behind me and a black male, got out, brandished a firearm and told me to get the f--- away from the car. I just remember pleading and asking with him to let me get my daughter out of the car. 'Let me get my baby out of the car.'
"The guy got in the car, drove off. I tried to run after him. I couldn't keep up with him," D'Andre said.
And D'Andre tells Crime Watch Daily a second man drove away in the carjacker's red sedan.
"The next thing that I remember was me getting to her mother's house," D'Andre said.
.............
Interesting, D'Andre apparently suffers an attack of global amnesia post car-jacking.
That'll be why he didn't call the police then, he just walked like a zombie to his mothers house.
Derion Vence suffered a similar affliction when he was car-jacked.
That’s a very intelligent signature line you’ve got going on there Spammy. @)(++(*
-
D'Andre tells me in an exclusive Crime Watch Daily telephone interview what he says he told investigators.
"I pulled over to the side to get out and check and see what was going on with the car," said D'Andre. "The car that blew the horn at me stopped behind me and a black male, got out, brandished a firearm and told me to get the f--- away from the car. I just remember pleading and asking with him to let me get my daughter out of the car. 'Let me get my baby out of the car.'
"The guy got in the car, drove off. I tried to run after him. I couldn't keep up with him," D'Andre said.
And D'Andre tells Crime Watch Daily a second man drove away in the carjacker's red sedan.
"The next thing that I remember was me getting to her mother's house," D'Andre said.
.............
Interesting, D'Andre apparently suffers an attack of global amnesia post car-jacking.
That'll be why he didn't call the police then, he just walked like a zombie to her mothers house.
Derion Vence suffered a similar affliction when he was car-jacked.
To be fair spammers, he may not have had the phone number for the police, 8)-))) but to walk to the mothers house ,passing people and shops and not go in and mentioning his daughter was abducted.. hmmm
-
To be fair spammers, he may not have had the phone number for the police, 8)-))) but to walk to the mothers house ,passing people and shops and not go in and mentioning his daughter was abducted.. hmmm
And for him to be innocent you would have to explain Bianca’s older sister’s testimony about seeing her the morning she went missing, mute and covered with a blanket.
-
in Luz Grime said the alerts have no evidential relaibility...in the lane case it appears hes changed his mind. The question is why. It cant be ignored that as a leading expert witness he does have a financial interest.
-
And for him to be innocent you would have to explain Bianca’s older sister’s testimony about seeing her the morning she went missing, mute and covered with a blanket.
And yet Bianca’s mother is convinced she is still alive.
-
in Luz Grime said the alerts have no evidential relaibility...in the lane case it appears hes changed his mind. The question is why. It cant be ignored that as a leading expert witness he does have a financial interest.
This has always been the problem with Martin Grime.
-
in Luz Grime said the alerts have no evidential relaibility...in the lane case it appears hes changed his mind. The question is why. It cant be ignored that as a leading expert witness he does have a financial interest.
He also says they must be corroberated, which, in the Lane case, the prosecutors decided they were. The case didn't rely on the alerts, it relied on a collection of evidence of which they were just one part.
-
He also says they must be corroberated, which, in the Lane case, the prosecutors decided they were. The case didn't rely on the alerts, it relied on a collection of evidence of which they were just one part.
why has grime now changed his mind and presented the alerts as evidence
-
He also says they must be corroberated, which, in the Lane case, the prosecutors decided they were. The case didn't rely on the alerts, it relied on a collection of evidence of which they were just one part.
in Luz he was clear the alerts could only be corroborated by human remains
-
in Luz he was clear the alerts could only be corroborated by human remains
Was he?
-
He also says they must be corroberated, which, in the Lane case, the prosecutors decided they were. The case didn't rely on the alerts, it relied on a collection of evidence of which they were just one part.
Casting the dog alerts to one side for a moment, what was the “beyond reasonable doubt” evidence that was presented in court?
-
And yet Bianca’s mother is convinced she is still alive.
And ?
-
Casting the dog alerts to one side for a moment, what was the “beyond reasonable doubt” evidence that was presented in court?
I suggest you read the reports.
-
I suggest you read the reports.
I have, and I ask again, what is the beyond reasonable doubt evidence?
-
And ?
Clearly she is not convinced by the dogs or the other circumstantial evidence, so why are you?
-
Was he?
Yes it's in his statement or rog
-
why has grime now changed his mind and presented the alerts as evidence
As G-unit said in the post before yours "The case didn't rely on the alerts, it relied on a collection of evidence of which they were just one part." You even quoted it yourself.
-
Clearly she is not convinced by the dogs or the other circumstantial evidence, so why are you?
I’m not convinced by the dogs. Im convinced by the child’s sibling’s testimony. What reason did she have to lie ?
-
I’m not convinced by the dogs. Im convinced by the child’s sibling’s testimony. What reason did she have to lie ?
What reason did her cousin have to lie that he saw her alive in the morning?
-
What reason did her cousin have to lie that he saw her alive in the morning?
One morning can be confused for another. It’s very hard to misremember the fact that your sibling was sitting beside you, mute and covered in a blanket.
-
One morning can be confused for another. It’s very hard to misremember the fact that your sibling was sitting beside you, mute and covered in a blanket.
The cousin was in the same car at the same time and claims Bianca was alive. You choose to believe one over rhe other, not because of any incontrovertible evidence but because you choose to. Your choice.
-
The cousin was in the same car at the same time and claims Bianca was alive. You choose to believe one over rhe other, not because of any incontrovertible evidence but because you choose to. Your choice.
You have still given no reason why Bianca’s sibling may have lied.
-
You have still given no reason why Bianca’s sibling may have lied.
Was she mistaken too?
-
You have still given no reason why Bianca’s sibling may have lied.
She was an eight year old child, and I don’t think she lied. Did she say she saw Bianca dead? No. But I tell you what, I’ll offer the same explanation as you gave me re: the cousin’s testimony - one morning can be confused for another, ok?
-
Was she mistaken too?
Mistaken that she saw her sibling mute and covered in a blanket ? What do you think ?
-
She was an eight year old child, and I don’t think she lied. Did she say she saw Bianca dead? No. But I tell you what, I’ll offer the same explanation as you gave me re: the cousin’s testimony - one morning can be confused for another, ok?
I accept that....but mute and covered in a blanket.....any day that deserves an explanation.
-
I have, and I ask again, what is the beyond reasonable doubt evidence?
Can you think of any reason why I'm obliged to find that information for you?
-
I accept that....but mute and covered in a blanket.....any day that deserves an explanation.
Listen, I think on the balance of probabilities he likely did it, I just don’t think there’s evidence beyond reasonable doubt that he did though.
-
Can you think of any reason why I'm obliged to find that information for you?
To further the discussion? But if you don’t want to that’s fine, I understand completely.
-
As G-unit said in the post before yours "The case didn't rely on the alerts, it relied on a collection of evidence of which they were just one part." You even quoted it yourself.
That has no relevance to why grime has had such a massive change of mind...
-
Mistaken that she saw her sibling mute and covered in a blanket ? What do you think ?
Was she sure who was under the blanket?
-
To further the discussion? But if you don’t want to that’s fine, I understand completely.
What's stopping you from finding it so as to achieve your objective of furthering the discussion?
-
What's stopping you from finding it so as to achieve your objective of furthering the discussion?
There is none to find, that’s my point.
-
That has no relevance to why grime has had such a massive change of mind...
When a professional changes his opinion to such a degree it's normally expected that there would be evidence to warrant the change... What evidence does grime have to make this change
-
There is none to find, that’s my point.
I think you're mistaken, but whatever evidence was presented it convinced a jury.
-
When a professional changes his opinion to such a degree it's normally expected that there would be evidence to warrant the change... What evidence does grime have to make this change
He's got more faith in Morse than he had in Eddie?
-
He's got more faith in Morse than he had in Eddie?
Faith isn't evidence
-
Faith isn't evidence
Just guessing.
-
I think you're mistaken, but whatever evidence was presented it convinced a jury.
Juries are not difficult to convince
If the mccanns were tried in a Portuguese court on the present evidence
...proven facts the dog alerted to cadaver... Dna
I think they would be found guilty
-
Juries are not difficult to convince
If the mccanns were tried in a Portuguese court on the present evidence
...proven facts the dog alerted to cadaver... Dna
I think they would be found guilty
In my opinion this is just part of your ongoing campaign against Martin Grime. That campaign suggests to me that you see the alerts by his dogs as far from meaningless.
-
I think you're mistaken, but whatever evidence was presented it convinced a jury.
I know I’m not, it was all circumstantial, nothing whatsoever of substance.
-
I know I’m not, it was all circumstantial, nothing whatsoever of substance.
That is why I don't like circumstantial evidence but it is accepted by the courts and society in general. But there is always room to question it.
-
I know I’m not, it was all circumstantial, nothing whatsoever of substance.
Except witnesses of course.
-
Except witnesses of course.
witness statements are circumstantial evidence. Not one of them claimed to have seen the girl dead or being killed did they?
-
witness statements are circumstantial evidence. Not one of them claimed to have seen the girl dead or being killed did they?
Very, very few murder cases involve witnesses who actually see the victim being killed. Are you saying their evidence should be discounted ? Further you said he was most probably guilty so you must have given those same witness’s evidence weight.
-
Very, very few murder cases involve witnesses who actually see the victim being killed. Are you saying their evidence should be discounted ? Further you said he was most probably guilty so you must have given those same witness’s evidence weight.
Three words: beyond reasonable doubt.
-
Three words: beyond reasonable doubt.
Obviously it wasn’t as he’s rotting in prison.
The jury heard all the evidence, not just the reported segments.
-
Obviously it wasn’t as he’s rotting in prison.
The jury heard all the evidence, not just the reported segments.
yes, because juries, like dogs, are infallible.
-
yes, because juries, like dogs, are infallible.
Neither is the judgement of internet detectives....so I’ll go with twelve good men and true who actually heard the whole of the evidence and decided on that.
-
In my opinion this is just part of your ongoing campaign against Martin Grime. That campaign suggests to me that you see the alerts by his dogs as far from meaningless.
its rather telling that your post is ad hom and you seem unable to challenge the points I am making. Im afraid you are totally mistaken as to your suggestions. I question the alerts...purely because of the lack of evidence to support them. Grime claimed he didnt know which car belonged to Lane....I wonder how many had child seats in the back.
11 alerts in jersey...most to baby teeth...yet Grime now says the dog would not alert to them...cant you see any inconsistency...i can and Im sure others can too
-
That is why I don't like circumstantial evidence but it is accepted by the courts and society in general. But there is always room to question it.
Do you not think it might depend on quantity?
If there were (say) 50 or 100 or more pieces of circumstantial evidence, rather than just a couple, would that not be much more significant?
-
Neither is the judgement of internet detectives....so I’ll go with twelve good men and true who actually heard the whole of the evidence and decided on that.
one of the judges in the Cipriano trial did not think she was guilty....there was an interview with GA and a portuguese journalist who said most portuguese dont think shes guilty....i support her because I dont think she is a child killer
-
one of the judges in the Cipriano trial did nit think she was guilty....tthere was an interview with GA and a portuguese journalist who said most portuguese dont think shes guilty....i support her because I dont think she is a child killer
I wonder why she didn't bother to call the police when her daughter was abducted?
-
I wonder why she didn't bother to call the police when her daughter was abducted?
Yes, a coincedence or what?
Kate didn't think to call the police immediatly she wasted time running to tell people who could do nothin then had a wee run around checking.
Lang staggered all the way to mothers house passing people and shops,forgetting to call the police?
Lesson to learn: if your child is abducted call emergency police RIGHT AWAY.
-
Neither is the judgement of internet detectives....so I’ll go with twelve good men and true who actually heard the whole of the evidence and decided on that.
That’s all very well but the inescapable fact is there was no solid evidence against him proving beyond reasonable doubt that he did the deed.
-
I know I’m not, it was all circumstantial, nothing whatsoever of substance.
Is this the evidence of which you said there's none to find? How can you form an opinion about something you can't find so have no knowledge of?
-
Is this the evidence of which you said there's none to find? How can you form an opinion about something you can't find so have no knowledge of?
I asked for “beyond reasonable doubt” evidence, you refused to supply it, that’s because there was no incontrovertible proof of Lane’s guilt. Is that not true? If not, what did I miss?
-
I asked for “beyond reasonable doubt” evidence, you refused to supply it, that’s because there was no incontrovertible proof of Lane’s guilt. Is that not true? If not, what did I miss?
It's the jury's job to decide if the evidence is enough to convince them of guilt 'beyond reasonable doubt'. The jury thought it did and Lane was jailed. I don't think it matters whether it convinces you or not.
-
If Lane was carjacked & his daughter was abducted then he suffered an attack of amnesia preventing him from calling the police & then also failed a polygraph.
How unfortunate for this poor innocent man.
-
If Lane was carjacked & his daughter was abducted then he suffered an attack of amnesia preventing him from calling the police & then also failed a polygraph.
How unfortunate for this poor innocent man.
Some people are just born to play the victim role.
-
It's the jury's job to decide if the evidence is enough to convince them of guilt 'beyond reasonable doubt'. The jury thought it did and Lane was jailed. I don't think it matters whether it convinces you or not.
And it's thr police who decide who should be investigated.. It doesn't matter what you or anyone here thinks
-
America does seem to have a propensity towards Miscarriages of Justice. Never mind, at least they aren't going to execute Lane.
-
It's the jury's job to decide if the evidence is enough to convince them of guilt 'beyond reasonable doubt'. The jury thought it did and Lane was jailed. I don't think it matters whether it convinces you or not.
Of course it doesn’t matter to anyone think what I think, nor what you think either, that doesn’t stop us expressing our views though does it?
-
If Lane was carjacked & his daughter was abducted then he suffered an attack of amnesia preventing him from calling the police & then also failed a polygraph.
How unfortunate for this poor innocent man.
Perhaps what with him being black and all he had an antipathy towards the police and thought they might try and stitch him up?
-
And it's thr police who decide who should be investigated.. It doesn't matter what you or anyone here thinks
Then the prosecutors decide whether to prosecute. I don't think anything because I don't care whether Lane was guilty or not. I'm sumply pointing out that a jury found him guilty based on the evidence oresented.
-
Perhaps what with him being black and all he had an antipathy towards the police and thought they might try and stitch him up?
Are all police officers white then?
-
Then the prosecutors decide whether to prosecute. I don't think anything because I don't care whether Lane was guilty or not. I'm sumply pointing out that a jury found him guilty based on the evidence oresented.
I care about whether he was guilty or not.
-
I care about whether he was guilty or not.
He was guilty.
-
He was guilty.
I am not convinced. And I certainly don't think that your Opinion is reliable.
-
I am not convinced. And I certainly don't think that your Opinion is reliable.
So you believe his story, that he was carjacked then suffered a mental blackout?
Does that really sound likely to you?
Do you want to buy some magic beans?
-
Watch part 5, or better still the whole episode and tell me that the evidence against Lane was overwhelming. He was re-arrested and charged purely on the cadaver dog evidence alone as the other other evidence hardly amounted to a hill of beans, with one of the key witnesses now admitting she witheld vital information under oath
https://truecrimedaily.com/2017/09/20/motor-city-mystery-where-is-baby-bianca/
-
Are all police officers white then?
Not all. Do most petty criminals (particularly black ones) have much faith in the police to treated them fairly, without prejudice - what do you think?
-
So you believe his story, that he was carjacked then suffered a mental blackout?
Does that really sound likely to you?
Do you want to buy some magic beans?
Ya think I'm completely stupid? Don't answer that.
-
Watch part 5, or better still the whole episode and tell me that the evidence against Lane was overwhelming. He was re-arrested and charged purely on the cadaver dog evidence alone as the other other evidence hardly amounted to a hill of beans, with one of the key witnesses now admitting she witheld vital information under oath
https://truecrimedaily.com/2017/09/20/motor-city-mystery-where-is-baby-bianca/
I watched part 5 & none of it convinced me Lane was carjacked by child abductors then suffered a blackout.
-
Not all. Do most petty criminals (particularly black ones) have much faith in the police to treated them fairly, without prejudice - what do you think?
He never mentioned his fear of being framed as his reason for not calling the police, why not?
-
America does seem to have a propensity towards Miscarriages of Justice. Never mind, at least they aren't going to execute Lane.
Britain is no paragon of virtue in that neither.
-
If Lane was carjacked & his daughter was abducted then he suffered an attack of amnesia preventing him from calling the police & then also failed a polygraph.
How unfortunate for this poor innocent man.
He seems to share his lack of luck with the McCanns.
-
I watched part 5 & none of it convinced me Lane was carjacked by child abductors then suffered a blackout.
There’s a surprise.
-
He never mentioned his fear of being framed as his reason for not calling the police, why not?
What reason did he give?
-
Lane was only charged because of the unsubstantiated dog alerts.
-
There’s a surprise.
You find his account convincing?
Seriously?
-
Lane was only charged because of the unsubstantiated dog alerts.
He was convicted because of the cadaver dog alerts & also because his account failed to convince a jury.
I can't imagine why not. He's got all the McCann supporters convinced.
-
He was convicted because of the cadaver dog alerts & also because his account failed to convince a jury.
I can't imagine why not. He's got all the McCann supporters convinced.
A rather sweeping statement as is.the norm.
-
A rather sweeping statement as is.the norm.
Are you not convinced D'Andre was carjacked?
You'll be the first McCann supporter here if not.
-
Are you not convinced D'Andre was carjacked?
You'll be the first McCann supporter here if not.
Know nothing about the case..
-
You find his account convincing?
Seriously?
I’ve already said he probably did it, but I wouldnt say the evidence against him put me beyond reasonable doubt. I’m troubled by the accounts of two individuals, one of whom was a police officer at the time, who claims she is 100% certain she saw the child a week after thr incident, reported her sighting to the cop shop and they told her they wern’t interested because they knew the kid was dead, and this was before the dog alerts! Plus the main evidence against him apart from the dog alerts was his girlfriend’s testimony and she now claims the child was alive after thr beating she claimed to have heard.
-
He was convicted because of the cadaver dog alerts & also because his account failed to convince a jury.
I can't imagine why not. He's got all the McCann supporters convinced.
I said he was CHARGED because of the dog alerts. Grime obviously did a very good job convincing the jury that a dog alert is 100% infallible, no supporting evidence required because there was precious little else the cops had on him, apart from his previous record.
-
I said he was CHARGED because of the dog alerts. Grime obviously did a very good job convincing the jury that a dog alert is 100% infallible, no supporting evidence required because there was precious little else the cops had on him, apart from his previous record.
I know what you said, I'm not blind.
I'm also not gullible enough to believe there's even the remotest chance that D'Andre's ridiculous story has any truth to it.
-
Do you not think it might depend on quantity?
If there were (say) 50 or 100 or more pieces of circumstantial evidence, rather than just a couple, would that not be much more significant?
Look I do understand how it works, but in some cases I still question it.
-
There doesn't seem to be any explanation as to why Grime has made such a change on what corroborates an alert.
-
I know what you said, I'm not blind.
I'm also not gullible enough to believe there's even the remotest chance that D'Andre's ridiculous story has any truth to it.
I’m glad you’re not blind because that means you will have noticed there was no conclusive proof that he killed his daughter even if you refuse to admit it.
-
I’m glad you’re not blind because that means you will have noticed there was no conclusive proof that he killed his daughter even if you refuse to admit it.
Just the cadaver dog that is almost never wrong alerting to the scent if death in several places associated with bianca
-
I’m glad you’re not blind because that means you will have noticed there was no conclusive proof that he killed his daughter even if you refuse to admit it.
Either his daughter was abducted or he faked the abduction because she was dead.
It's obvious she wasn't abducted, so that just leaves dead.
-
Either his daughter was abducted or he faked the abduction because she was dead.
It's obvious she wasn't abducted, so that just leaves dead.
So the policewoman who is 100% certain she saw Bianca a week later in a house that she later discovered belonged to a relative of Bianca’s mother should just be ignored in your view?
-
So the policewoman who is 100% certain she saw Bianca a week later in a house that she later discovered belonged to a relative of Bianca’s mother should just be ignored in your view?
I'm certain she was mistaken because it's obvious Bianca is dead.
What are you doing to help find Bianca?
-
I'm certain she was mistaken because it's obvious Bianca is dead.
What are you doing to help find Bianca?
What an incredibly stupid question, imo. What should I be doing bearing in mind I agree that she is likely dead and probably at the hands of her father however I’m not certain of this and think the evidence against him was weak. I would not be hugely shocked if it turned out he was wrongfully convicted and the child was still alive, but you would presumably be utterly gobsmacked and massively disappointed to be proven wrong if this was the case. I guess I’m just not as arrogant and dogmatic as you appear to be.
-
What an incredibly stupid question, imo. What should I be doing bearing in mind I agree that she is likely dead and probably at the hands of her father however I’m not certain of this and think the evidence against him was weak. I would not be hugely shocked if it turned out he was wrongfully convicted and the child was still alive, but you would presumably be utterly gobsmacked and massively disappointed to be proven wrong if this was the case. I guess I’m just not as arrogant and dogmatic as you appear to be.
I'm certain she won't be found & her father will rot in prison where he belongs for years to come.
-
I'm certain she won't be found & her father will rot in prison where he belongs for years to come.
Well good for you! Your certainty makes not a jot of difference to the fact that the evidence against him was weak.
-
What reason did he give?
He hasn't claimed he is being framed has he?. He could pull the race card, but the he said it was black men who kidknapped his daughter...
-
Morse failed to alert to the car seat back at the station when it was wrapped in brown paper.
-
He hasn't claimed he is being framed has he?. He could pull the race card, but the he said it was black men who kidknapped his daughter...
Yes he has, by his ex I believe.
-
What an incredibly stupid question, imo. What should I be doing bearing in mind I agree that she is likely dead and probably at the hands of her father however I’m not certain of this and think the evidence against him was weak. I would not be hugely shocked if it turned out he was wrongfully convicted and the child was still alive, but you would presumably be utterly gobsmacked and massively disappointed to be proven wrong if this was the case. I guess I’m just not as arrogant and dogmatic as you appear to be.
What convinces you that she is likely dead and her father is probably the perpetrator ?
-
Well good for you! Your certainty makes not a jot of difference to the fact that the evidence against him was weak.
The evidence was strong enough to convince a jury & that's all that matters.
-
Yes he has, by his ex I believe.
.
His ex believes him. He comes across as a 'gaslighter'.IMO. Witnesses claimed he was cruel to the children what does mum say about that? Anyone know?
-
Morse failed to alert to the car seat back at the station when it was wrapped in brown paper.
That was reported in a newspaper, but is it a fact?
-
That was reported in a newspaper, but is it a fact?
Not if it doesn't suit you it seems.... Who do you think made it up
-
one of the judges in the Cipriano trial did not think she was guilty....there was an interview with GA and a portuguese journalist who said most portuguese dont think shes guilty....i support her because I dont think she is a child killer
I agree but she was complicit in the cover-up so was guilty by way of joint enterprise. I also believe she was given too harsh a sentence whereas the real killer got a light one.
-
I agree but she was complicit in the cover-up so was guilty by way of joint enterprise. I also believe she was given too harsh a sentence whereas the real killer got a light one.
What was she found guiltily of
-
What convinces you that she is likely dead and her father is probably the perpetrator ?
What convinces you I’m convinced? I’m not. I think on balance it’s likely but I have reasonable doubt also.
-
What convinces you I’m convinced? I’m not. I think on balance it’s likely but I have reasonable doubt also.
Why?
What evidence makes you think it likely?
-
Why?
What evidence makes you think it likely?
His strict, bullying treatment of his children mainly, although by most accounts he was a good father. Not all bullies become killers though.
-
What convinces you I’m convinced? I’m not. I think on balance it’s likely but I have reasonable doubt also.
What makes you think it’s likely then if not all bullies become killers ?
-
What makes you think it’s likely then if not all bullies become killers ?
The fact that some do.
-
The fact that some do.
But the majority don’t. Is that really all that it took to make you think that it was likely Lane was guilty ?
What if Gerry McCann is a bully ? Would it make it more likely that he was guilty of some part in Madeleine’s disappearance?
-
But the majority don’t. Is that really all that it took to make you think that it was likely Lane was guilty ?
What if Gerry McCann is a bully ? Would it make it more likely that he was guilty of some part in Madeleine’s disappearance?
If he was known to ram wet knickers into his child’s mouth and hit them with sticks, yes, definitely.
-
If he was known to ram wet knickers into his child’s mouth and hit them with sticks, yes, definitely.
Who said that ? Oh yes one of the witnesses you chose to believe.
So the dog alerts ? Coincidence?
-
His strict, bullying treatment of his children mainly, although by most accounts he was a good father. Not all bullies become killers though.
It would be interesting to find out who made the claims he was a 'good father' strict is one thing nothing wrong with discipline, but his behaviour was sadistic,cruel and unforgivable. People also claimed that despite his demenour The kiddie killer philpot 'loves' his children- burned them alive but was a good father when they were alive I SUPPOSE.
-
It would be interesting to find out who made the claims he was a 'good father' strict is one thing nothing wrong with discipline, but his behaviour was sadistic,cruel and unforgivable. People also claimed that despite his demenour The kiddie killer philpot 'loves' his children- burned them alive but was a good father when they were alive I SUPPOSE.
His children and umpteen girlfriends said he was a good father. I expect they were all lying though.
-
Who said that ? Oh yes one of the witnesses you chose to believe.
So the dog alerts ? Coincidence?
I don’t choose to believe it, it’s circumstantial evidence so I take it as such, same as the dog alerts. No actual evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he killed Bianca.
-
His children and umpteen girlfriends said he was a good father. I expect they were all lying though.
victims of abuse blame themselves and are persuaded by the absuser their behaviour is for their own good.Abused women still stay with abusive husbands through fear or because they are convinced the b@strds love them and its not his fault he loses it now and then...
-
victims of abuse blame themselves and are persuaded by the absuser their behaviour is for their own good.Abused women still stay with abusive husbands through fear or because they are convinced the b@strds love them and its not his fault he loses it now and then...
Once they’re in prison for life children and girlfriends are probably more inclined to spill the beans about the abuse if they hadn’t already IMO. I don’t think this has happened in this case. I haven’t seen any evidence that suggests he beat up his partners.
-
Once they’re in prison for life children and girlfriends are probably more inclined to spill the beans about the abuse if they hadn’t already IMO. I don’t think this has happened in this case. I haven’t seen any evidence that suggests he beat up his partners.
When you put it like that maybe he deserves a retrial. What I was thinking he had so many girlfriends and kids from various mothers it got so complicated to know which kid is their child. So if you saw a child who looked like Bianca Jones, short of a DNA test, one wouldn't be sure who they were looking at.
-
https://eu.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2014/11/30/detroit-police-fight-carjacking-crime/19671313/
*snipped*
"Carjackings occur at an alarming rate in Detroit. Six years ago, the city had 1,231 carjackings — more than three a day. By last year, that number had dropped significantly to 701, but that was still the highest known number of carjackings for any major city in the country.
Through Nov. 17 this year, Detroit has seen 485 carjackings, more than one a day. That's down 31% from last year, yet still three times more than the 160-some carjackings New York City, with 10 times Detroit's population, saw all of last year."
Based on these statistics, it would not be unreasonable to presume Lane was telling the truth.
-
https://eu.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2014/11/30/detroit-police-fight-carjacking-crime/19671313/
*snipped*
"Carjackings occur at an alarming rate in Detroit. Six years ago, the city had 1,231 carjackings — more than three a day. By last year, that number had dropped significantly to 701, but that was still the highest known number of carjackings for any major city in the country.
Through Nov. 17 this year, Detroit has seen 485 carjackings, more than one a day. That's down 31% from last year, yet still three times more than the 160-some carjackings New York City, with 10 times Detroit's population, saw all of last year."
Based on these statistics, it would not be unreasonable to presume Lane was telling the truth.
And what are they car jacking for? The actual vehicle or do the car jackers believe the vehicle contains sought after items eg cash, drugs, firearms?
-
https://eu.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2014/11/30/detroit-police-fight-carjacking-crime/19671313/
*snipped*
"Carjackings occur at an alarming rate in Detroit. Six years ago, the city had 1,231 carjackings — more than three a day. By last year, that number had dropped significantly to 701, but that was still the highest known number of carjackings for any major city in the country.
Through Nov. 17 this year, Detroit has seen 485 carjackings, more than one a day. That's down 31% from last year, yet still three times more than the 160-some carjackings New York City, with 10 times Detroit's population, saw all of last year."
Based on these statistics, it would not be unreasonable to presume Lane was telling the truth.
It's unbelievable that he would phone a friend as opposed to calling the police after being carjacked.
-
https://eu.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2014/11/30/detroit-police-fight-carjacking-crime/19671313/
*snipped*
"Carjackings occur at an alarming rate in Detroit. Six years ago, the city had 1,231 carjackings — more than three a day. By last year, that number had dropped significantly to 701, but that was still the highest known number of carjackings for any major city in the country.
Through Nov. 17 this year, Detroit has seen 485 carjackings, more than one a day. That's down 31% from last year, yet still three times more than the 160-some carjackings New York City, with 10 times Detroit's population, saw all of last year."
Based on these statistics, it would not be unreasonable to presume Lane was telling the truth.
Or he's aware that it's a very plausible crime, given the prevalence. If there were 3 car jackings every decade it would hardly lend credence to the story.
-
It’s astounding how many different carjacking cases which involved the taking of a young child there are when you google it.
-
It's unbelievable that he would phone a friend as opposed to calling the police after being carjacked.
perhaps he was carrying something for someone ... a friend...and thought his friend might be more help than the police
-
perhaps he was carrying something for someone ... a friend...and thought his friend might be more help than the police
Yes his friend was able to help more.........by calling the police.
-
I don’t choose to believe it, it’s circumstantial evidence so I take it as such, same as the dog alerts. No actual evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he killed Bianca.
No evidence of an abduction of MBM but still you say it is so.
The jurors saw it as beyond reasonable doubt with the evidence presented.
This is just a rant of words with no substance: "Once they’re in prison for life children and girlfriends are probably more inclined to spill the beans about the abuse if they hadn’t already IMO. I don’t think this has happened in this case. I haven’t seen any evidence that suggests he beat up his partners"
You have no evidence of "probably more inclined to spill the beans about the abuse" How about you have not got a clue about these matters
and what evidence would you be seeking exactly for " I haven’t seen any evidence that suggests he beat up his partners" You were presented with evidence he was cruel to his children, who never told anyone about the abuse.
and perhaps hs ex partners do not want to complain because 'they love him'
google 'Gaslighting' for a better understanding
-
Yes his friend was able to help more.........by calling the police.
Whether it was staged or not Lane would have known that the cops would soon be involved.
-
Yes his friend was able to help more.........by calling the police.
you obviously live avery prim and proper life and have no experience of gangs and drugs in Detroit...perhaps the police wouldnt be able to help him...just thinking outside the tin
-
And what are they car jacking for? The actual vehicle or do the car jackers believe the vehicle contains sought after items eg cash, drugs, firearms?
Yeah stealing a child and leaving the engine running makes no sence at all.
-
No evidence of an abduction of MBM but still you say it is so.
The jurors saw it as beyond reasonable doubt with the evidence presented.
This is just a rant of words with no substance: "Once they’re in prison for life children and girlfriends are probably more inclined to spill the beans about the abuse if they hadn’t already IMO. I don’t think this has happened in this case. I haven’t seen any evidence that suggests he beat up his partners"
You have no evidence of "probably more inclined to spill the beans about the abuse" How about you have not got a clue about these matters
and what evidence would you be seeking exactly for " I haven’t seen any evidence that suggests he beat up his partners" You were presented with evidence he was cruel to his children, who never told anyone about the abuse.
and perhaps hs ex partners do not want to complain because 'they love him'
google 'Gaslighting' for a better understanding
When you can figure out a way of replying to my posts without using words like “rant” to describe what I have written I might be bothered to give you the time of day. I know what gaslighting is without having to google it, thanks.
-
And what are they car jacking for? The actual vehicle or do the car jackers believe the vehicle contains sought after items eg cash, drugs, firearms?
perhaps it did....lane wouldnt tell...that would be the death penalty...and not from the police
-
you obviously live avery prim and proper life and have no experience of gangs and drugs in Detroit...perhaps the police wouldnt be able to help him...just thinking outside the tin
No, I've no experience of gangs & drugs in Detroit. Have you?
-
No, I've no experience of gangs & drugs in Detroit. Have you?
Need you ask ? @)(++(*
-
No, I've no experience of gangs & drugs in Detroit. Have you?
you dont really expect me to answer that question do you
-
Yeah stealing a child and leaving the engine running makes no sence at all.
This was obviously a targeted child abduction as they didn't want the car.
Maybe it's the same abductor gang that took Joana & Maddie.
Quick, to the helicopters!
-
No, I've no experience of gangs & drugs in Detroit. Have you?
you dont really expect me to answer that question do you
-
This was obviously a targeted child abduction as they didn't want the car.
Maybe it's the same abductor gang that took Joana & Maddie.
Quick, to the helicopters!
so you're coming round to abduction now...I knew you would.
-
When you can figure out a way of replying to my posts without using words like “rant” to describe what I have written I might be bothered to give you the time of day. I know what gaslighting is without having to google it, thanks.
You talked about bullying- you snipe and sneer at almost all sceptics posts @)(++(* then bemoan when I refer to yours as a rant. I don't need your input-means nothing to me.
People who live in glass houses and all that...
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykapi-47ZJk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykapi-47ZJk)
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykapi-47ZJk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykapi-47ZJk)
she said the cadaver dog was instrumnetal...an alert which was judged to have no evidential value is now described as in stru mental......
-
she said the cadaver dog was instrumnetal...an alert which was judged to have no evidential value is now described as in stru mental......
Indeed. The fact that he ran straight to the correct car out of 31 might have had something to do with that.
-
You talked about bullying- you snipe and sneer at almost all sceptics posts @)(++(* then bemoan when I refer to yours as a rant. I don't need your input-means nothing to me.
People who live in glass houses and all that...
Quit ranting.
-
Indeed. The fact that he ran straight to the correct car out of 31 might have had something to do with that.
amazing that...did any other car have a child seat in it
-
Indeed. The fact that he ran straight to the correct car out of 31 might have had something to do with that.
Putting that along with evidence that family heard baby bianca screams after a 'beating' for wetting herself
(no one went to her rescue). The dad then appears with the badlybeaten child,propping her up, as if she is alive, the witness nephew claims he thought she was alive as she had her eyes open and was staring..
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hs=fyd&q=image+of+dead+body+with+open+eyes&tbm=isch&source=univ&client=opera&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjducP3xK[Name removed]AhXEMewKHT0eBP8Q7Al6BAgIEA0&biw=1326&bih=658
So very loud screams from a baby at getting a beating with a sick-then... silence- the disappears
-
Putting that along with evidence that family heard baby bianca screams after a 'beating' for wetting herself
(no one went to her rescue). The dad then appears with the badlybeaten child,propping her up, as if she is alive, the witness nephew claims he thought she was alive as she had her eyes open and was staring..
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hs=fyd&q=image+of+dead+body+with+open+eyes&tbm=isch&source=univ&client=opera&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjducP3xK[Name removed]AhXEMewKHT0eBP8Q7Al6BAgIEA0&biw=1326&bih=658
So very loud screams from a baby at getting a beating with a sick-then... silence- the disappears
Except his ex fiance now says she did hear the child talking after the beating.
-
Indeed. The fact that he ran straight to the correct car out of 31 might have had something to do with that.
so are you saying the dog ran straight to the car...ignoring all the others...its what the judge said...so its what the jury was told...but is it what happened
-
so are you saying the dog ran straight to the car...ignoring all the others...its what the judge said...so its what the jury was told...but is it what happened
If it’s true then why did the dog not run direct to the McCanns car?
-
Except his ex fiance now says she did hear the child talking after the beating.
Did she indeed. Ofcourse she did- She hears a baby screaming - getting a beating with a stick from a grown man and does nothing. OK.
she sounds like the caring kind of person.
-
so are you saying the dog ran straight to the car...ignoring all the others...its what the judge said...so its what the jury was told...but is it what happened
The judge talks as if there is video evidence from FBI staff. I can't imagine Grime and dogs not being moniored in case a crime scene is declared. GThe babay seat wasn't inside the car according to what the judge says.
-
If it’s true then why did the dog not run direct to the McCanns car?
Who knows. I'm repeating what the 30 year prosecutor / judge said.
-
If it’s true then why did the dog not run direct to the McCanns car?
There are varying levels of cadaver odour. Even humans can sense cadaver odour if it gets strong enough.
-
There are varying levels of cadaver odour. Even humans can sense cadaver odour if it gets strong enough.
For God's sake do me a favour.
-
For God's sake do me a favour.
That is true, and factually the reason the dog runs to the right car.
-
The judge talks as if there is video evidence from FBI staff. I can't imagine Grime and dogs not being moniored in case a crime scene is declared. GThe babay seat wasn't inside the car according to what the judge says.
It was... According to newspaper reports the seat was taken back to base and the police tried to hide the seat by wrapping it in brown paper... Wanted to see just how good the dog was.... Morse failed to alert to it
-
There are varying levels of cadaver odour. Even humans can sense cadaver odour if it gets strong enough.
It’s quite pungent.
-
There are varying levels of cadaver odour. Even humans can sense cadaver odour if it gets strong enough.
If there had been a cadaver in the McCanns car it would have been a lot stinkier than the cadaver in Lane’s car.
-
It’s quite pungent.
I haven't experienced human cadaver odour myself.
-
It's, all a bit odd.. In the lane case Morse ran straight TO the car and in PDL Eddue, walked, straight past the car
-
It's, all a bit odd.. In the lane case Morse ran straight TO the car and in PDL Eddue, walked, straight past the car
Different dogs. Different good boys. And girls.
-
It's, all a bit odd.. In the lane case Morse ran straight TO the car and in PDL Eddue, walked, straight past the car
Then he went back to the car, had a right good sniff of the door seal then snapped his head back & nearly barked himself off his feet. This can only mean one thing......abduction!
-
Then he went back to the car, had a right good sniff of the door seal then snapped his head back & nearly barked himself off his feet. This can only mean one thing......abduction!
Or “is this the one you want me to bark at? OK, then, anything for a laugh and a Scooby Snack”
-
Or “is this the one you want me to bark at? OK, then, anything for a laugh and a Scooby Snack”
That's precisely why they shouldn't be rewarded while they are on the job IMO.
-
I missed where they were rewarded in the McCann dog footage?
14 May 2008 Martin Grime Rogatory
Q. Based upon your experience with the dogs, can you specify whether the positive signals given by them have always matched the scientific results?
A. I cannot. In this case, for example, not all the alert signals have been investigated by the appropriate agencies in order to provide forensic comparisons, in spite of indications to the contrary. It also should be taken into account that the procedures for forensic testing are still less discriminating than the system of dogs’ smell. During training, the dogs are barely rewarded for positive alert signals regarding targets of known substances.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
-
I missed where they were rewarded in the McCann dog footage?
14 May 2008 Martin Grime Rogatory
Q. Based upon your experience with the dogs, can you specify whether the positive signals given by them have always matched the scientific results?
A. I cannot. In this case, for example, not all the alert signals have been investigated by the appropriate agencies in order to provide forensic comparisons, in spite of indications to the contrary. It also should be taken into account that the procedures for forensic testing are still less discriminating than the system of dogs’ smell. During training, the dogs are barely rewarded for positive alert signals regarding targets of known substances.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
OK During training, the dogs are barely rewarded for positive alert signals regarding targets of known substances.
What does barely mean in this context. I think in terms of giving the dog a reward but not over doing it. So when is it given a thorough reward?
I'm not saying Grime rewarded his dogs during investigation work, but I do wonder how he kept his dogs enthusiasm up.
-
I missed where they were rewarded in the McCann dog footage?
14 May 2008 Martin Grime Rogatory
Q. Based upon your experience with the dogs, can you specify whether the positive signals given by them have always matched the scientific results?
A. I cannot. In this case, for example, not all the alert signals have been investigated by the appropriate agencies in order to provide forensic comparisons, in spite of indications to the contrary. It also should be taken into account that the procedures for forensic testing are still less discriminating than the system of dogs’ smell. During training, the dogs are barely rewarded for positive alert signals regarding targets of known substances.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
Have you access to the full, unedited rushes of the dog searches? Because if you haven’t then you can’t be sure.
-
The alerte in this case were coroborated by anectdotal witness statemnts...why didnt grime say the same in 2007...what has caused his change of mind
-
The alerte in this case were coroborated by anectdotal witness statemnts...why didnt grime say the same in 2007...what has caused his change of mind
He didn't. He did a cracking job, as did the dogs. Well done to all concerned, getting over there at short notice to help to find out what happened to a missing little girl. Bravo that man.
-
If the McCann case had happened in Detroit the parents would be doing 30 years inside now. Do forum members think that would be the correct decision of the jury? If so why?
-
He didn't. He did a cracking job, as did the dogs. Well done to all concerned, getting over there at short notice to help to find out what happened to a missing little girl. Bravo that man.
My statement is based on fact... Not opinion.. In the lane case Grime has stated that the alerts, are confirmed by anectdotal witness statements... Why did he, say something totally different in 2007
-
If the McCann case had happened in Detroit the parents would be doing 30 years inside now. Do forum members think that would be the correct decision of the jury? If so why?
If Grimes evidence had been put before a jury as it was in the lane case ..I think there, no doubt the McCann's would have been found guilty
-
He didn't. He did a cracking job, as did the dogs. Well done to all concerned, getting over there at short notice to help to find out what happened to a missing little girl. Bravo that man.
Well said! I can't believe that people are questioning Lane's coviiction just because (imo) Grime was involved. I think that's a step too far.
-
If the McCann case had happened in Detroit the parents would be doing 30 years inside now. Do forum members think that would be the correct decision of the jury? If so why?
I doubt it D'Andre Lane is black and working class. The McCanns white and middle class.
-
If the McCann case had happened in Detroit the parents would be doing 30 years inside now. Do forum members think that would be the correct decision of the jury? If so why?
It's an impossible question to answer, as we are not in full receipt of the facts. I believe there's way more 'evidence' both ways that we are not privy to.
I see your point though; it is very unusual to make such a conviction without a body, so proponents of a fair judicial system, which we all should be, may find Lane's conviction 'unfair'.
And I'm sure if he had access to a top lawyer there's a very good chance he would not be convicted.
The McCann's would almost certainly have had access to the best legal representation in your hypothetical scenario, so, equally, they would also in all probability not be convicted.
Edit: In addition, do I think Lane should have been convicted on the evidence? No. Do I think he did it? Absolutely. So did the jury, which a good defence attorney should warn a jury against.
-
If the McCann case had happened in Detroit the parents would be doing 30 years inside now. Do forum members think that would be the correct decision of the jury? If so why?
Lane was judged on the evidence presented, which included the dog alerts. If the McCanns were tried in Detroit it would depend on the rest of the evidence. This also happened in the Pilley case were Gilroy was convicted on a circumstantial case which included cadaver dog evidence.
-
My statement is based on fact... Not opinion.. In the lane case Grime has stated that the alerts, are confirmed by anectdotal witness statements... Why did he, say something totally different in 2007
Can you provide a cite for the bolded text? If not, then you are not using facts.
-
Lane was judged on the evidence presented, which included the dog alerts. If the McCanns were tried in Detroit it would depend on the rest of the evidence. This also happened in the Pilley case were Gilroy was convicted on a circumstantial case which included cadaver dog evidence.
Agreed I think there's a lot of circumstantial about D'Andre Lane plus a history of previous.
-
Lane was judged on the evidence presented, which included the dog alerts. If the McCanns were tried in Detroit it would depend on the rest of the evidence. This also happened in the Pilley case were Gilroy was convicted on a circumstantial case which included cadaver dog evidence.
There was no compelling evidence in the Lane case.
-
Agreed I think there's a lot of circumstantial about D'Andre Lane plus a history of previous.
So are we saying there is no circumstantial evidence or history of previous in the McCann case?
-
If the McCann case had happened in Detroit the parents would be doing 30 years inside now. Do forum members think that would be the correct decision of the jury? If so why?
What is the rest of the chain of circumstantial evidence against the McCanns?
1. Is there evidence that Gerry or Kate beat the kids?
2. Are their statements full of illogical inconsistencies?
You are not going to get a conviction just on a dog alert/alerts.
There was no compelling evidence in the Lane case.
It is the chain of evidence that makes the total compelling. I'm not sure about the case myself, but the jury has found against him.
So are we saying there is no circumstantial evidence or history of previous in the McCann case?
In Kate's arguido questions the PJ were looking for evidence of previous.
-
My statement is based on fact... Not opinion.. In the lane case Grime has stated that the alerts, are confirmed by anecdotal witness statements... Why did he, say something totally different in 2007
Well what were the anecdotal witness statements in the McCann case that could be used? If there were none he couldn't say it IMO.
-
There was no compelling evidence in the Lane case.
It was a circumstantial case....he was found guilty on the sum of the evidence not one compelling element.
-
It was a circumstantial case....he was found guilty on the sum of the evidence not one compelling element.
Would he have been found guilty without the dog alerts do you think?
-
Would he have been found guilty without the dog alerts do you think?
That’s an unanswerable question.
-
Well what were the anecdotal witness statements in the McCann case that could be used? If there were none he couldn't say it IMO.
martin smith and family seeing gerry mccann carrrying a child...
you must realise harrison said physical evidence was required and grime said as no remains were found then the alerts could not BECOME corroborated
-
That’s an unanswerable question.
I asked this question before. Putting the dog alerts to one side what was the compelling, beyond reasonable doubt evidence against Lane?
-
That’s an unanswerable question.
the judge seemed to think that the alert evidence was very important....yet previously grime was clear...the alerts themselves have no evidential reliability
-
the judge seemed to think that the alert evidence was very important....yet previously grime was clear...the alerts themselves have no evidential reliability
And ?
-
martin smith and family seeing gerry mccann carrrying a child...
you must realise harrison said physical evidence was required and grime said as no remains were found then the alerts could not BECOME corroborated
That statement by the Smiths came after the statement by Martin Grime. So it wasn't an anecdotal statement at the time.
Any others you can think of?
-
the judge seemed to think that the alert evidence was very important....yet previously grime was clear...the alerts themselves have no evidential reliability
.... no evidential reliability without corroborating evidence (DNA etc). " He actually used the term "etc" in a statement which makes the list undefined IMO.
-
.... no evidential reliability without corroborating evidence (DNA etc). " He actually used the term "etc" in a statement which makes the list undefined IMO.
thats in relation to the CSI dog...not cadaver......its in his white paper
-
thats in relation to the CSI dog...not cadaver......its in his white paper
I tend to think you are proving Harrison was lying, when he said there was a need for physical evidence, for what sort of physical evidence could be found? If DNA wasn't enough, what is left?
Was a finger or a fingernail likely to be found at this stage?
-
I tend to think you are proving Harrison was lying, when he said there was a need for physical evidence, for what sort of physical evidence could be found? If DNA wasn't enough, what is left?
i dont think for a second harrison was lying...physical evidence taken with grimes sateemnt is human remains..dna does not confirnm a cadaver alert
-
i dont think for a second harrison was lying...physical evidence taken with grimes sateemnt is human remains..dna does not confirnm a cadaver alert
Dav, is there a B side?
-
i dont think for a second harrison was lying...physical evidence taken with grimes sateemnt is human remains..dna does not confirnm a cadaver alert
Of course but where can the human remains come from? If she was found in a skip bin would that do?
-
Dav, is there a B side?
Yes but it will sound like another version of side A.
-
Dav, is there a B side?
The B-side is the instrumental remix, not worth bothering with.
-
.... no evidential reliability without corroborating evidence (DNA etc). " He actually used the term "etc" in a statement which makes the list undefined IMO.
which statement ...cite
-
Dav, is there a B side?
yes why dont you go to it
-
Of course but where can the human remains come from? If she was found in a skip bin would that do?
no...not according to grime
-
which statement ...cite
We've already been there, you say it only applies to the CSI dog.
-
no...not according to grime
And would you be happy with that? If a body was found in a skip bin and the dog alerted in the McCann's apartment that is evidence the death occurred in the apartment, or at least the cadaver had been in the apartment?
I don't think you would personally.
-
We've already been there, you say it only applies to the CSI dog.
According to grime
-
According to grime
Make up your mind - do you agree with him or not?
-
And would you be happy with that? If a body was found in a skip bin and the dog alerted in the McCann's apartment that is evidence the death occurred in the apartment, or at least the cadaver had been in the apartment?
I don't think you would personally.
If a body was found in a skip that the alerts do not prove maddie died in the apartment... That should be obvious to anyone
-
Make up your mind - do you agree with him or not?
I'm quoting grime... And fwiw... It makes sense
-
If a body was found in a skip that the alerts do not prove maddie died in the apartment... That should be obvious to anyone
Exactly so how was anyone going to satisfy Harrison's requirement for proof?
-
Exactly so how was anyone going to satisfy Harrison's requirement for proof?
What did grime say
As no remains were found the only alerts that can become corroborated are the CSI
That means the cadaver alerts cannot be corroborated... It's perfectly clear.
-
What did grime say
As no remains were found the only alerts that can become corroborated are the CSI
That means the cadaver alerts cannot be corroborated... It's perfectly clear.
Well we know that the alerts weren't corroborated unless one considers that the personal effects or even the ashes of the previous owner of 5a had lain in that apartment for some time thereby leaving a scent which Eddie recognised and so alerted to it. By the way, did the PJ ever check any of this out?
-
What did grime say
As no remains were found the only alerts that can become corroborated are the CSI
That means the cadaver alerts cannot be corroborated... It's perfectly clear.
Aren't you forgetting his caveat? "In this case" I think he said
-
Aren't you forgetting his caveat? "In this case" I think he said
Mark Harrison never made any such caveat. ..did grime intend one.. Why should the McCann case be any different
-
Mark Harrison never made any such caveat. ..did grime intend one.. Why should the McCann case be any different
I have no intention of combing their statements to see what they said. If you want to prove something provide yout cites. Let's just remember that Harrison and Grime were both search experts. They weren't detectives or prosecutors who are the experts when it comes to choosing and presenting evidence.
-
I have no intention of combing their statements to see what they said. If you want to prove something provide yout cites. Let's just remember that Harrison and Grime were both search experts. They weren't detectives or prosecutors who are the experts when it comes to choosing and presenting evidence.
I've provided cites today. Grime said ni evidential reliability... Are you saying a prosecutor can overide that
-
I've provided cites today. Grime said ni evidential reliability... Are you saying a prosecutor can overide that
If they want to.
-
If they want to.
They theoretically can but wouldnt it be rather stupid..
Grime called as an expert witness would have to state the alerts have no evidential reliability... If the jury had heard the evidence that could result in a mistrial... The alerts have to have the support of an expert witness
-
They theoretically can but wouldnt it be rather stupid..
Grime called as an expert witness would have to state the alerts have no evidential reliability... If the jury had heard the evidence that could result in a mistrial... The alerts have to have the support of an expert witness
[Gosh remember we battled over expert witnesses once before.]
What I had been wondering about is this: does Grime get called as an "expert witness" if he was involved in the actual investigation?
-
[Gosh remember we battled over expert witnesses once before.]
What I had been wondering about is this: does Grime get called as an "expert witness" if he was involved in the actual investigation?
He said as much when he was asked to reply to several questions put forward by forum members. He said that he couldn't reply because it was a live enquiry and that answering questions in the public domain might jeopardize any subsequent trial.
-
I've provided cites today. Grime said ni evidential reliability... Are you saying a prosecutor can overide that
Have you provided copied and pasted cites with links to the original documents?
A prosecutor decides whether to use evidence, not a dog handler.
-
He said as much when he was asked to reply to several questions put forward by forum members. He said that he couldn't reply because it was a live enquiry and that answering questions in the public domain might jeopardize any subsequent trial.
I know he is an expert but to me that doesn't make him an "expert witness". I'm going to have to study expert witnesses again.
-
I know he is an expert but to me that doesn't make him an "expert witness". I'm going to have to study expert witnesses again.
According to his linked in profile he is under contract ss, an expert witness to the FBI canine programme
-
Have you provided copied and pasted cites with links to the original documents?
A prosecutor decides whether to use evidence, not a dog handler.
Could the alerts which have been described as having no evidential value or reliability be admitted as evidence
Do you need a cite for no evidential reliability
-
Have you provided copied and pasted cites with links to the original documents?
A prosecutor decides whether to use evidence, not a dog handler.
I have on several occasions as you well know... If posters have such short memories there's little I can do about it
-
According to his linked in profile he is under contract ss, an expert witness to the FBI canine programme
OK he can be called as an expert witness, but if he is out there in the field with his dogs I'd be surprised if he is called as anything more than a witness.
-
OK he can be called as an expert witness, but if he is out there in the field with his dogs I'd be surprised if he is called as anything more than a witness.
What di you think the difference is
-
What di you think the difference is
I'll get back to you on that it after 1:00 AM here.
-
Could the alerts which have been described as having no evidential value or reliability be admitted as evidence
Do you need a cite for no evidential reliability
Yes and yes.
-
Yes and yes.
remember you are stating opinion...and its obviously wrong imo
Harrisson says...
However, it must be stated any such indications without any physical evidence to support them can not have any evidential value, being unconfirmed indications. Additionally I consider no inference can be drawn as to whether a human cadaver has previously been in any location without other supporting physical evidence.
www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
harrison is very clear...no infernce and no evidential value..
are you suggsting harrison is wrong..
how can evidence be admitted taht is described by experts as having no evidential relaibility or value
in the netflix...Grime again refers to the alerts as intelligence...not evidence
-
There's another case coming up in the US where the defence has attempted to deny evidence of dogs,the judge overruled and its to be allowed.
A judge overseeing the trial of Mark Redwine, a Vallecito man accused of killing his 13-year-old son, Dylan, upheld a decision this week to allow evidence obtained by sniffing dogs at trial, despite the defense’s argument that such evidence is unscientific and unreliable.
https://pinerivertimes.com/articles/101902
-
There's another case coming up in the US where the defence has attempted to deny evidence of dogs,the judge overruled and its to be allowed.
A judge overseeing the trial of Mark Redwine, a Vallecito man accused of killing his 13-year-old son, Dylan, upheld a decision this week to allow evidence obtained by sniffing dogs at trial, despite the defense’s argument that such evidence is unscientific and unreliable.
https://pinerivertimes.com/articles/101902
its interesting,...I dont think the judge has made a final decision yet...one to watch
-
Jst because courts adnit evidence it does not mean its reliable
www.innocenceproject.org/overturning-wrongful-convictions-involving-flawed-forensics/
The Justice Department and FBI have formally acknowledged that nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000.
Of 28 examiners with the FBI Laboratory’s microscopic hair comparison unit, 26 overstated forensic matches in ways that favored prosecutors in more than 95 percent of the 268 trials reviewed so far, according to the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) and the Innocence Project, which are assisting the government with the country’s largest post-conviction review of questioned forensic evidence.
The cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death. Of those, 14 have been executed or died in prison, the groups said under an agreement with the government to release results after the review of the first 200 convictions.
what a damning report
-
remember you are stating opinion...and its obviously wrong imo
Harrisson says...
However, it must be stated any such indications without any physical evidence to support them can not have any evidential value, being unconfirmed indications. Additionally I consider no inference can be drawn as to whether a human cadaver has previously been in any location without other supporting physical evidence.
www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
harrison is very clear...no infernce and no evidential value..
are you suggsting harrison is wrong..
how can evidence be admitted taht is described by experts as having no evidential relaibility or value
in the netflix...Grime again refers to the alerts as intelligence...not evidence
I wonder if someone had a word with him? He said the above after Eddie alerted. This is what he said before Eddie alerted. This is what Harrison said before the searches took place.
23/07/2007
"In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed."
www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
-
I wonder if someone had a word with him? He said the above after Eddie alerted. This is what he said before Eddie alerted. This is what Harrison said before the searches took place.
23/07/2007
"In relation to the dead body scent if such a scent is indicated by the EVRD and no body is located it may suggest that a body has been in the property but removed."
www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
conspiracy theory...Of course it may suggest....just as the statistics for children who are harmed might suggest its the parents wh are responsible...but that is not evidence...its intelligence
-
Jst because courts adnit evidence it does not mean its reliable
www.innocenceproject.org/overturning-wrongful-convictions-involving-flawed-forensics/
The Justice Department and FBI have formally acknowledged that nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000.
Of 28 examiners with the FBI Laboratory’s microscopic hair comparison unit, 26 overstated forensic matches in ways that favored prosecutors in more than 95 percent of the 268 trials reviewed so far, according to the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) and the Innocence Project, which are assisting the government with the country’s largest post-conviction review of questioned forensic evidence.
The cases include those of 32 defendants sentenced to death. Of those, 14 have been executed or died in prison, the groups said under an agreement with the government to release results after the review of the first 200 convictions.
what a damning report
I think it's very amusing how far some people will go in order to defend a couple from Leicester. Police officers, legal systems, judges must all be dicredited.
-
Its a mystery to me why certain people spend time and effort digging all these obscure cases up to defend the McCanns when there isn't a snowball chance in hell of them being before a Judge.
Still, it obviously gives them a reason to get up in the morning
-
I think it's very amusing how far some people will go in order to defend a couple from Leicester. Police officers, legal systems, judges must all be dicredited.
Then you have totally misunderstood the point of my post
I'm interested in the rule if law... That's what's very important
This thread is about Lane.. Not the McCann's... And it seems there may be another case featuring the alerts
-
Its a mystery to me why certain people spend time and effort digging all these obscure cases up to defend the McCanns when there isn't a snowball chance in hell of them being before a Judge.
Still, it obviously gives them a reason to get up in the morning
Another one who has misunderstood... This thread is about lane and the US
Yet another pathetic personal attack
-
Another one who has misunderstood... This thread is about lane and the US
Yet another pathetic personal attack
In which case it is totally irrelevant to this forum.
-
remember you are stating opinion...and its obviously wrong imo
Harrisson says...
However, it must be stated any such indications without any physical evidence to support them can not have any evidential value, being unconfirmed indications. Additionally I consider no inference can be drawn as to whether a human cadaver has previously been in any location without other supporting physical evidence.
www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
harrison is very clear...no infernce and no evidential value..
are you suggsting harrison is wrong..
how can evidence be admitted taht is described by experts as having no evidential relaibility or value
in the netflix...Grime again refers to the alerts as intelligence...not evidence
Is a bit of paper with writing on it physical?
-
Is a bit of paper with writing on it physical?
No it's not classed as physical evidence
-
No it's not classed as physical evidence
Do you agree with Grime's science? Look Grime and Harrison are not a scientists, nor lawyers, so you would be unwise to take what they say as anymore than their poor understanding of the situation.
-
No it's not classed as physical evidence
It's not what now?
Someone give Poirot a nudge.
So if there's a piece of paper at a crime scene and it says 'I'm gonna murder you, you t!t', in the accused handwriting, time stamped, with his saliva on it....not physical? Jungian Metaphysicality?
-
It's not what now?
Someone give Poirot a nudge.
So if there's a piece of paper at a crime scene and it says 'I'm gonna murder you, you t!t', in the accused handwriting, time stamped, with his saliva on it....not physical? Jungian Metaphysicality?
8**8:/: I fear some would want video evidence of that note being written- to screen -just to make sure mind...
but then even a signed confession along with the note would not be trusted as it may have been forced from him. ^*&&
-
Do you agree with Grime's science? Look Grime and Harrison are not a scientists, nor lawyers, so you would be unwise to take what they say as anymore than their poor understanding of the situation.
You say Harrison is not a scientist... That's quite a silly thing to say.. He's a visiting professor of Ocean Sciences..
And you think they both have a poor understanding of the situation.. Stated as fact. ...not opinion
I think based on that post I'd be very unwise to take seriously anything you say
-
8**8:/: I fear some would want video evidence of that note being written- to screen -just to make sure mind...
but then even a signed confession along with the note would not be trusted as it may have been forced from him. ^*&&
Torture, no less.
Well they do say that waterboarding in Guantanamo Bay sounds awfully good fun if you don't know what either of those two things are.
-
Do you agree with Grime's science? Look Grime and Harrison are not a scientists, nor lawyers, so you would be unwise to take what they say as anymore than their poor understanding of the situation.
Mark Harrison... What dies he know..
I am the National Adviser in relation to Search for all Police agencies within the United Kingdom for Missing persons, Abduction and Homicide. My role involves advising on searching for persons that are missing, abducted or murdered, using enhanced search techniques and technologies. I attend and review cases providing advice and support on search plans, strategies and resources. I have extensive national and international experience in such casework. I am a visiting Professor of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the University of Southampton.
-
It's not what now?
Someone give Poirot a nudge.
So if there's a piece of paper at a crime scene and it says 'I'm gonna murder you, you t!t', in the accused handwriting, time stamped, with his saliva on it....not physical? Jungian Metaphysicality?
I was being a bit naughty trying to tease Davel into agreeing that statements written on paper are examples of physical evidence.
I agree, and a suicide note from Madeleine would have been considered physical evidence too. Or even a note saying she is leaving, for a better life.
"Dear Mum and Dad,
I've had enough of this neglect.
I'm leaving now.
Love you Daddy.
Maddie.
You say Harrison is not a scientist... That's quite a silly thing to say.. He's a visiting professor of Ocean Sciences..
And you think they both have a poor understanding of the situation.. Stated as fact. ...not opinion
I think based on that post I'd be very unwise to take seriously anything you say
You could be right. OK I stand corrected if you can show me was a professor of Ocean Science.
" I am a visiting Professor of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the University of Southampton." Is that like an honorary achievement?
-
I was being a bit naughty trying to tease Davel into agreeing that statements written on paper are examples of physical evidence.
I agree, and a suicide note from Madeleine would have been considered physical evidence too. Or even a note saying she is leaving, for a better life.
"Dear Mum and Dad,
I've had enough of this neglect.
I'm leaving now.
Love you Daddy.
Maddie.
You could be right. OK I stand corrected if you can show me was a professor of Ocean Science.
" I am a visiting Professor of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the University of Southampton." Is that like an honorary achievement?
A visiting professor is not an honorary title
-
I was being a bit naughty trying to tease Davel into agreeing that statements written on paper are examples of physical evidence.
I agree, and a suicide note from Madeleine would have been considered physical evidence too. Or even a note saying she is leaving, for a better life.
"Dear Mum and Dad,
I've had enough of this neglect.
I'm leaving now.
Love you Daddy.
Maddie.
You could be right. OK I stand corrected if you can show me was a professor of Ocean Science.
" I am a visiting Professor of Earth and Ocean Sciences at the University of Southampton." Is that like an honorary achievement?
Sounds like a Bengal degree to me: Emeritus Erstwhile Professor of Charcoal and Anthracite Deposits, Polytechnic of East Didsbury
-
A visiting professor is not an honorary title
This review doesn't think much of the title:
https://www.salon.com/2015/02/19/americas_visiting_professor_scam_how_colleges_are_watering_down_higher_education/
"Once upon a time, the “visiting” title meant something. It signified a certain level of status—you were good enough in your field to leave your own institution and grace another with your presence. You were a specialist and you were talented. Today, however, that is no longer the case.
The entire American higher education system is moving in the same cynical direction, hiring fewer long-term faculty members and more visitors. Accordingly, the “visiting” qualifier is now an empty signifier meant to confuse both students and job seekers. Like its counterparts, “in-residence” or “term,” the visiting title is meant to distinguish contingent faculty members from long-term, tenured colleagues. These suggestive adjectives are meant to mislead, because visiting and in-residence positions are typically one step away from the lowly "adjunct" status in the faculty hierarchy. Visiting professors are affiliated with institutions on a short-term contract, and rarely, despite the grumblings of the labor market, result in transition to a long-term, tenure-track position."
-
Torture, no less.
Well they do say that waterboarding in Guantanamo Bay sounds awfully good fun if you don't know what either of those two things are.
Yes it does sound like a posh version of body boarding in Cornwall- very exotic!
-
Sounds like a Bengal degree to me: Emeritus Erstwhile Professor of Charcoal and Anthracite Deposits, Polytechnic of East Didsbury
That degree would be more appropriate IMO.
-
This review doesn't think much of the title:
https://www.salon.com/2015/02/19/americas_visiting_professor_scam_how_colleges_are_watering_down_higher_education/
"Once upon a time, the “visiting” title meant something. It signified a certain level of status—you were good enough in your field to leave your own institution and grace another with your presence. You were a specialist and you were talented. Today, however, that is no longer the case.
The entire American higher education system is moving in the same cynical direction, hiring fewer long-term faculty members and more visitors. Accordingly, the “visiting” qualifier is now an empty signifier meant to confuse both students and job seekers. Like its counterparts, “in-residence” or “term,” the visiting title is meant to distinguish contingent faculty members from long-term, tenured colleagues. These suggestive adjectives are meant to mislead, because visiting and in-residence positions are typically one step away from the lowly "adjunct" status in the faculty hierarchy. Visiting professors are affiliated with institutions on a short-term contract, and rarely, despite the grumblings of the labor market, result in transition to a long-term, tenure-track position."
So now you wish to try and discredit Harrison... A bit pathetic
-
That degree would be more appropriate IMO.
Well I don't think your opinions worth a fat lot
-
So now you wish to try and discredit Harrison... A bit pathetic
Don't you want to discredit our hero and Expert Witness Martin Grime and his wonderful dogs, bless their names.
-
Well I don't think your opinions worth a fat lot
Come on Davros, a bit harsh. It's all fun and games 'til someone loses an eye.
-
Don't you want to discredit our hero and Expert Witness Martin Grime and his wonderful dogs, bless their names.
His dogs are wonderful... Read my posts properly and you'll see I've never said a bad thing about the dogs
-
His dogs are wonderful... Read my posts properly and you'll see I've never said a bad thing about the dogs
How would you define "a bad thing about the dogs" . Never?
-
His dogs are wonderful... Read my posts properly and you'll see I've never said a bad thing about the dogs
Bless you Professor Davros, bless you.
-
Bless you Professor Davros, bless you.
Only visiting
-
Bless you Professor Davros, bless you.
Do you think Davros will complain about the blessing, being a staunch atheist.
-
How would you define "a bad thing about the dogs" . Never?
I think the dogs are excellent at detecting cadaver odour
-
Do you think Davros will complain about the blessing, being a staunch atheist.
No good scientist can be an atheist
-
Only visiting
touché
-
Only visiting
Visiting between the temporary bans.
-
No good scientist can be an atheist
Probably why I'm an atheist. Rubbish at science.
-
r
Visiting between the temporary bans.
The unjust temporary bans
-
The unjust temporary bans
Right - Back to the topic before we are all given a temporary ban.
-
Right - Back to the topic before we are all given a temporary ban.
You can ban yourself?
-
You can ban yourself?
I would need to report my own posts and load up the warning points. It then would be up to john or admin to make the final decision.
-
In the lane case grime said he didnt know which car belonged to lane...he also said in the mccann case he didnt know which car belonged to the mccanns....thats an important point as if he knew which car belonged to the suspect there could be some bias...but he obviously didnt
-
In the lane case grime said he didnt know which car belonged to lane...he also said in the mccann case he didnt know which car belonged to the mccanns....thats an important point as if he knew which car belonged to the suspect there could be some bias...but he obviously didnt
"He obviously didn't"what?
-
"He obviously didn't"what?
He obviously didn't know it was the McCann's car
-
The change in the dog's behaviour when passing the car was nothing to do with Grime.
-
The change in the dog's behaviour when passing the car was nothing to do with Grime.
It couldn't be anything to do with grime because grime didn't know it was the McCann's car
-
The change in the dog's behaviour when passing the car was nothing to do with Grime.
Yes if you combine the smith sighting which corroborates the alerts it's enough to put Gerry in the slammer for 20
-
The change in the dog's behaviour when passing the car was nothing to do with Grime.
Was Grime not aware of the child car seats in the Scenic or Lane's borrowed Marquis? How many of the other vehicles in each respective line-up contained child seats?
IMO Eddie was far more interested in the Skoda Fabia, the vehicle next in line in Luz to be examined. He returned to it several times but was repeatedly called away.
-
Yes if you combine the smith sighting which corroborates the alerts it's enough to put Gerry in the slammer for 20
The Smith sighting doesn’t corroborate the alerts. It is important though. Smith’s statement is entirely credible, IMO , . We know who he said he thought it was but before that was known the sighting was mostly ignored by Mitchell and the parents. This is incredible given , IMO, the fact that they wanted us to believe in an abduction. By the time of Dave Edgar’s documentary and the acceptance that Smithman is not something that can be ignored you get these ridiculous scenarios of Tanner/Smithman carrying a child around the streets for 40 minutes and the big fat lie that the PJ had investigated Smithman and ruled out that it was GM.
-
Was Grime not aware of the child car seats in the Scenic or Lane's borrowed Marquis? How many of the other vehicles in each respective line-up contained child seats?
IMO Eddie was far more interested in the Skoda Fabia, the vehicle next in line in Luz to be examined. He returned to it several times but was repeatedly called away.
Nah... totally different behaviour around the two cars. People need to accept that 90-100% of the time the dogs will alert correctly. The dogs don’t lie.
-
Nah... totally different behaviour around the two cars. People need to accept that 90-100% of the time the dogs will alert correctly. The dogs don’t lie.
Dogs don't lie... But humans do
-
Dogs don't lie... But humans do
Grime has no reason to. If you want to create reasonable doubt at least try to argue something that’s a little bit more credible than nappies, urine, beef, shrimp and Grime the lying bent copper!!
-
Nah... totally different behaviour around the two cars. People need to accept that 90-100% of the time the dogs will alert correctly. The dogs don’t lie.
Dogs do lie actually.
https://www.indy100.com/article/your-dog-can-lie-to-get-treats-and-food-new-study-animal-cognition-8295566
-
Yes if you combine the smith sighting which corroborates the alerts it's enough to put Gerry in the slammer for 20
Are you deliberately being stupid Davel? Are you doing your irony thing again? How could Smith sighting corroborate the dog alerts?
Did the Smiths suggest the girl was deceased?
Did they positively identify Gerry?
Did they positively id Madeleine?
What happened to Gerry's alibi for the time of the sighting?
-
Dogs do lie actually.
https://www.indy100.com/article/your-dog-can-lie-to-get-treats-and-food-new-study-animal-cognition-8295566
That is a neat experiment. I was a little surprised they called that behaviour lying.
-
Grime has no reason to. If you want to create reasonable doubt at least try to argue something that’s a little bit more credible than nappies, urine, beef, shrimp and Grime the lying bent copper!!
Didn't mention grime.. But urine contains cadaverine
-
Didn't mention grime.. But urine contains cadaverine
Its not cadaverine that a cadaver dog alerts to, otherwise they would bark at all dead animals and patches of urine which in the end are virtually everywhere with kids and pets.
-
Its not cadaverine that a cadaver dog alerts to, otherwise they would bark at all dead animals and patches of urine which in the end are virtually everywhere with kids and pets.
Are you saying a cadaver dig will not react to cadaverine... I think that requires a cite... It may be in normal urine the concentration is just to small
-
Dogs do lie actually.
https://www.indy100.com/article/your-dog-can-lie-to-get-treats-and-food-new-study-animal-cognition-8295566
Hahaha - that has nothing to do with trained and accredited cadaver dogs. The dogs would be of no use to the Police if they often gave false alerts. The alerts are circumstantial. The Police are interested in finding material for forensics to examine. They don't want them barking randomly for treats. Dear me!!
-
Are you saying a cadaver dig will not react to cadaverine... I think that requires a cite... It may be in normal urine the concentration is just to small
I'd say no one truly knows what a cadaver dog smells when he reacts. Obviously he senses all the odours that are present. You can't just smell the one thing. Cadaverine would indicate the smell indicates something is dead, but is it a dead rat or mouse or a dead human.
Put up 3 vials of urine, I think most humans will tell you if the urine was from a rat or a mouse or a human.
The difference is not cadaverine which will have the same chemical structure no matter what the source.
-
I'd say no one truly knows what a cadaver dog smells when he reacts. Obviously he senses all the odours that are present. You can't just smell the one thing. Cadaverine would indicate the smell indicates something is dead, but is it a dead rat or mouse or a dead human.
Put up 3 vials of urine, I think most humans will tell you if the urine was from a rat or a mouse or a human.
The difference is not cadaverine which will have the same chemical structure no matter what the source.
The question is would a cadaver dog react ti very stale convenrated human urine... The answer I think is no one knows
-
The question is would a cadaver dog react ti very stale convenrated human urine... The answer I think is no one knows
Urine as you know is mostly water so the first thing is the water would evaporate off. Cadaverine if you look up Google is a liquid/gas too so it will evaporate off too. I don't think the cadaverine will be what remains as the odour.
-
Urine as you know is mostly water so the first thing is the water would evaporate off. Cadaverine if you look up Google is a liquid/gas too so it will evaporate off too. I don't think the cadaverine will be what remains as the odour.
Without a test we don't know
-
This is obviously a test for SIL's cadaver dog. See if it reacts to stale urine.
-
Without a test we don't know
Use your nose. I'm talking about what any person is capable of smelling.
-
Use your nose. I'm talking about what any person is capable of smelling.
I'm talking about a dog
-
I'm talking about a dog
Well test your dog then. I don't have a dog. SIL has a dog, maybe he could run a test.
Go to a local pet shop and blindfold yourself. Can you tell what species of animal you are near just by the smell of the cage? I doubt the difference in odours relates to cadaverine.
-
Well test your dog then. I don't have a dog. SIL has a dog, maybe he could run a test.
Go to a local pet shop and blindfold yourself. Can you tell what species of animal you are near just by the smell of the cage? I doubt the difference in odours relates to cadaverine.
Since we are humans we probably have no idea of what humans smell like to a dog.
-
Well test your dog then. I don't have a dog. SIL has a dog, maybe he could run a test.
Go to a local pet shop and blindfold yourself. Can you tell what species of animal you are near just by the smell of the cage? I doubt the difference in odours relates to cadaverine.
I'm interested in scientific validation if the alerts... Not more anecdotal evidence
-
I'm interested in scientific validation if the alerts... Not more anecdotal evidence
The experiment I suggested is also scientific. It can be measured and repeated.
-
Training is the key whatever a dog is used for. A dog is given access to the target scent over and over again. Every time he alerts to it he gets positive feedback. Not only is the dog learning which scent the trainer wants him to alert to, he's learning that the trainer can't be fooled. If the dog alerts when the scent isn't present no positive feedback is offered.
A fully trained dog knows exactly what he's looking for and exactly what he isn't looIking for. In the end the dog's alerts are a guarenteed Pavlovian response. A cadaver dog will alert every time he smells a decomposing human because he can't help it. Nothing else will trigger an alert.
-
Training is the key whatever a dog is used for. A dog is given access to the target scent over and over again. Every time he alerts to it he gets positive feedback. Not only is the dog learning which scent the trainer wants him to alert to, he's learning that the trainer can't be fooled. If the dog alerts when the scent isn't present no positive feedback is offered.
A fully trained dog knows exactly what he's looking for and exactly what he isn't looIking for. In the end the dog's alerts are a guarenteed Pavlovian response. A cadaver dog will alert every time he smells a decomposing human because he can't help it. Nothing else will trigger an alert.
For these dogs the target scent is human decomposition... But they also alert to blood and decomposing pig...so there isn't a single well defined target scent
-
Training is the key whatever a dog is used for. A dog is given access to the target scent over and over again. Every time he alerts to it he gets positive feedback. Not only is the dog learning which scent the trainer wants him to alert to, he's learning that the trainer can't be fooled. If the dog alerts when the scent isn't present no positive feedback is offered.
A fully trained dog knows exactly what he's looking for and exactly what he isn't looIking for. In the end the dog's alerts are a guarenteed Pavlovian response. A cadaver dog will alert every time he smells a decomposing human because he can't help it. Nothing else will trigger an alert.
Is this your opinion or a cite... Link?
-
Hahaha - that has nothing to do with trained and accredited cadaver dogs. The dogs would be of no use to the Police if they often gave false alerts. The alerts are circumstantial. The Police are interested in finding material for forensics to examine. They don't want them barking randomly for treats. Dear me!!
I know it’s nothing to do with cadaver dogs, I just find the cliche “dogs don’t lie” to be rather stupidly hilarious in itself and that was my light hearted riposte.
-
Training is the key whatever a dog is used for. A dog is given access to the target scent over and over again. Every time he alerts to it he gets positive feedback. Not only is the dog learning which scent the trainer wants him to alert to, he's learning that the trainer can't be fooled. If the dog alerts when the scent isn't present no positive feedback is offered.
A fully trained dog knows exactly what he's looking for and exactly what he isn't looIking for. In the end the dog's alerts are a guarenteed Pavlovian response. A cadaver dog will alert every time he smells a decomposing human because he can't help it. Nothing else will trigger an alert.
I thought the dogs had to be given a command before they started alerting?
-
I thought the dogs had to be given a command before they started alerting?
A working dog is constantly looking for commands, it makes no difference whether it is a sheepdog or a cadaver dog.
-
I'm interested in scientific validation if the alerts... Not more anecdotal evidence
Google is your friend. There's loads of articles in forensic science journals.
-
This is obviously a test for SIL's cadaver dog. See if it reacts to stale urine.
Gonçalo barked at his two cadaver finds to date.
He has never barked at stale urine, though he does enjoy sniffing it a lot. The village dogs like to mark 'their' territory on their adventures.
I've never thought about testing him on stale human urine.
Now I need a specimen bottle.
-
Training is the key whatever a dog is used for. A dog is given access to the target scent over and over again. Every time he alerts to it he gets positive feedback. Not only is the dog learning which scent the trainer wants him to alert to, he's learning that the trainer can't be fooled. If the dog alerts when the scent isn't present no positive feedback is offered.
A fully trained dog knows exactly what he's looking for and exactly what he isn't looIking for. In the end the dog's alerts are a guarenteed Pavlovian response. A cadaver dog will alert every time he smells a decomposing human because he can't help it. Nothing else will trigger an alert.
I've seen two instances where trained police cadaver dogs alerted to non-human remains. In both alerts it was necessary for human intervention to prove that the remains were non-human.
-
Google is your friend. There's loads of articles in forensic science journals.
I don't need to look... All the articles test whether the dog alerts to a known sample of cadaver odour.
All that tells us is the dogs will alert if a cadaver odour source is present ..it doesn't tell us if the dog will alert to other things
-
Gonçalo barked at his two cadaver finds to date.
He has never barked at stale urine, though he does enjoy sniffing it a lot. The village dogs like to mark 'their' territory on their adventures.
I've never thought about testing him on stale human urine.
Now I need a specimen bottle.
Your dog is not a properly trained cadaver dog
-
Your dog is not a properly trained cadaver dog
Don't worry about it.
You have recently rejected 'anecdotal' evidence. You have dismissed scientific evidence. You have refused to conduct your own research of scientific articles.
It is pretty clear that you're not going to accept anything, so why keep up the negativity?
Two forum members asked me perform an exercise utilising my dog. They did not ask me to resource a trained, tested, accredited police dog.
Feel free to reject the findings of this experiment before it has begun. I have come to expect no less.
-
Don't worry about it.
You have recently rejected 'anecdotal' evidence. You have dismissed scientific evidence. You have refused to conduct your own research of scientific articles.
It is pretty clear that you're not going to accept anything, so why keep up the negativity?
Two forum members asked me perform an exercise utilising my dog. They did not ask me to resource a trained, tested, accredited police dog.
Feel free to reject the findings of this experiment before it has begun. I have come to expect no less.
Pretty well all wrong
I reject anectdotal evidence... Any scientist would
I have not rejected any scientific evidence... Just pointed out the limitations of these particular studies
I've already run a search of scientific articles... None if them address the problem I've raised
-
Pretty well all wrong
I reject anectdotal evidence... Any scientist would
I have not rejected any scientific evidence... Just pointed out the limitations of these particular studies
I've already run a search of scientific articles... None if them address the problem I've raised
When your research is published in a scientific journal I’m sure we’ll all get the chance to have our say!
-
I don't need to look... All the articles test whether the dog alerts to a known sample of cadaver odour.
All that tells us is the dogs will alert if a cadaver odour source is present ..it doesn't tell us if the dog will alert to other things
Have you actually read the research? Perhaps some scientific researchers have taken account of this. I can’t find the reference but I’m sure I read some of the testing for Eddie (or FBI) had hidden samples from other dead or rotting substances (not human) as part of the testing .
-
When your research is published in a scientific journal I’m sure we’ll all get the chance to have our say!
I can have my say anyway... Sil does not have a cadaver dog..
He seems to think he has... Rob seems to think he has
-
Have you actually read the research? Perhaps some scientific researchers have taken account of this. I can’t find the reference but I’m sure I read some of the testing for Eddie (or FBI) had hidden samples from other dead or rotting substances (not human) as part of the testing .
every paper ive seen simply looks at the dogs ability to recognise target scent...fresh target scent at that. if you can find one that addresses false alerts to other products...
-
every paper ive seen simply looks at the dogs ability to recognise target scent...fresh target scent at that. if you can find one that addresses false alerts to other products...
You’ve got it all arse about tit, with respect. The dogs are trained to alert to cadaver odour . They are not trained to alert to dirty nappies, urine, faeces nor any other infinite list of things you care to claim they might alert to. You can then test if they do indeed successfully alert to the odour that they are trained to alert to.
-
You’ve got it all arse about tit, with respect. The dogs are trained to alert to cadaver odour . They are not trained to alert to dirty nappies, urine, faeces nor any other infinite list of things you care to claim they might alert to. You can then text if they do indeed successfully alert to the odour that they are trained to alert to.
you think i have... I think im bang on....
A dog’s utility depends on the skill of its handler. Identifying false signals is an important part of working with a cadaver dog, and results should be backed up with forensic testing. When a dog gives a signal, such as barking or sitting down, to indicate that it has smelled a corpse, a handler can only say something along the lines of, “My dog is giving an indication consistent with human blood.” He can’t say definitively that, yes, a body was present, without further confirmation—in the form of a blood stain, for example.
Got a question about today’s news? Ask the Explainer.
Explainer thanks Maria Claxton of the South Carolina Search and Rescue Dog Association, Larry Myers of the Auburn University College of Veterinary Medicine, and Andrew Rebmann of K9 Specialty Search Associates.
-
You’ve got it all arse about tit, with respect. The dogs are trained to alert to cadaver odour . They are not trained to alert to dirty nappies, urine, faeces nor any other infinite list of things you care to claim they might alert to. You can then text if they do indeed successfully alert to the odour that they are trained to alert to.
im looking for scientific confirmation...im not going to get it from someone who can only expresshimself in terms of "all arse about tit"...you believe what you want...and i will do the same
-
im looking for scientific confirmation...im not going to get it from someone who can only expresshimself in terms of "all arse about tit"...you believe what you want...and i will do the same
But you do understand that they are trained to alert to cadaver odour. It is made up of specific volatile organic compounds. Your objection to their efficacy could go on ad infinitum. There could be billions of things that you could say they will false alert to. It’s impossible to test all those items. It’s also ridiculous and unscientific to suggest it. Why would Eddie alert to mouthwash when he’s been trained to alert to cadaver odour... He does this with 92-100% accuracy. This alert is then a tool. It points a forensic team to a certain area. Nothing more... nothing less.
-
you think i have... I think im bang on....
A dog’s utility depends on the skill of its handler. Identifying false signals is an important part of working with a cadaver dog, and results should be backed up with forensic testing. When a dog gives a signal, such as barking or sitting down, to indicate that it has smelled a corpse, a handler can only say something along the lines of, “My dog is giving an indication consistent with human blood.” He can’t say definitively that, yes, a body was present, without further confirmation—in the form of a blood stain, for example.
Got a question about today’s news? Ask the Explainer.
Explainer thanks Maria Claxton of the South Carolina Search and Rescue Dog Association, Larry Myers of the Auburn University College of Veterinary Medicine, and Andrew Rebmann of K9 Specialty Search Associates.
Exactly right. As I just posted. The alert is an indication.The dogs are used as a very useful tool.
-
But you do understand that they are trained to alert to cadaver odour. It is made up of specific volatile organic compounds. Your objection to their efficacy could go on ad infinitum. There could be billions of things that you could say they will false alert to. It’s impossible to test all those items. It’s also ridiculous and unscientific to suggest it. Why would Eddie alert to mouthwash when he’s been trained to alert to cadaver odour... He does this with 92-100% accuracy. This alert is then a tool. It points a forensic team to a certain area. Nothing more... nothing less.
i know they alert to cadaver odour...but do they alert to other things as well..no tests ahve been done on taht topic
-
i know they alert to cadaver odour...but do they alert to other things as well..no tests ahve been done on taht topic
The list of things that you could claim they might alert to is endless. Your question is irrelevant. They are trained to alert to cadaver odour. The alerts are taken as an indication. That is all they are providing.
What else smells like the substance they are trained to alert to? With your logic don’t you wonder why science journals aren’t littered with research such as “do cadaver dogs alert to traffic lights “....”do cadaver dogs alert to prawn cocktail crisps”?? It must really frustrate you that instead the forensic science asks “do cadaver dogs accurately alert to cadaver odour “
-
The list of things that you could claim they might alert to is endless. Your question is irrelevant. They are trained to alert to cadaver odour. The alerts are taken as an indication. That is all they are providing.
What else smells like the substance they are trained to alert to? With your logic don’t you wonder why science journals aren’t littered with research such as “do cadaver dogs alert to traffic lights “....”do cadaver dogs alert to prawn cocktail crisps”?? It must really frustrate you that instead the forensic science asks “do cadaver dogs accurately alert to cadaver odour “
they are not being used as an indication...they are being used as evidence
-
I thought the dogs had to be given a command before they started alerting?
Before they start searching, perhaps. No-one would command a dog to alert.
-
The list of things that you could claim they might alert to is endless. Your question is irrelevant. They are trained to alert to cadaver odour. The alerts are taken as an indication. That is all they are providing.
What else smells like the substance they are trained to alert to? With your logic don’t you wonder why science journals aren’t littered with research such as “do cadaver dogs alert to traffic lights “....”do cadaver dogs alert to prawn cocktail crisps”?? It must really frustrate you that instead the forensic science asks “do cadaver dogs accurately alert to cadaver odour “
I know that my cadaver dog does not alert to traffic lights. Anecdotal? Take it or leave it as readers choose.
We don't eat prawn cocktail crisps, so I cannot attest to that. However, I have checked on availability. Baptista in Luz stocks them in summer. Iceland stocks them all year round.
Should I commission the purchase of a packet in order to conduct an anecdotal experiment with Gonçalo?
(&^&
-
Pretty well all wrong
I reject anectdotal evidence... Any scientist would
I have not rejected any scientific evidence... Just pointed out the limitations of these particular studies
I've already run a search of scientific articles... None if them address the problem I've raised
In my opinion that's because the 'problem' you think you've identified isn't a problem at all. These dogs are trained and assessed with all sorts of scents around them. The FACT that they find and alert to their target scent shows that they aren't going to alert to other scents.
-
In my opinion that's because the 'problem' you think you've identified isn't a problem at all. These dogs are trained and assessed with all sorts of scents around them. The FACT that they find and alert to their target scent shows that they aren't going to alert to other scents.
if what you said was true the alerts would be stand alone evidence,,,they are not...because its impossible to prove whats being alerted to if no remains are found
-
Before they start searching, perhaps. No-one would command a dog to alert.
I didn’t say that they would.
-
But you do understand that they are trained to alert to cadaver odour. It is made up of specific volatile organic compounds. Your objection to their efficacy could go on ad infinitum. There could be billions of things that you could say they will false alert to. It’s impossible to test all those items. It’s also ridiculous and unscientific to suggest it. Why would Eddie alert to mouthwash when he’s been trained to alert to cadaver odour... He does this with 92-100% accuracy. This alert is then a tool. It points a forensic team to a certain area. Nothing more... nothing less.
Eddie wasn't since Grime had no access to human remains prior Maddie's disappearance. Didn't he make a video on a beach showing that he used some bone material to train his dogs in the UK?
No two dogs have the same ability and no two dogs are trained the same. Every dog is unique, like humans, some are good at what they do while others aren't.
-
Eddie wasn't since Grime had no access to human remains prior Maddie's disappearance. Didn't he make a video on a beach showing that he used some bone material to train his dogs in the UK?
When did Grime train eddie on human remains in the us then?
He has additionally trained exclusively using human remains in the U.S.A. in association with the F.B.I.
-
if what you said was true the alerts would be stand alone evidence,,,they are not...because its impossible to prove whats being alerted to if no remains are found
It's impossible for scientists to confirm it. Scientific evidence isn't the gold standard you think it is though. Scientists have made mistakes and convictions have been overtrned.
Dog alerts can be used as circumstantial evidence when they are telling the same story as other evidence.
-
Eddie wasn't since Grime had no access to human remains prior Maddie's disappearance. Didn't he make a video on a beach showing that he used some bone material to train his dogs in the UK?
No two dogs have the same ability and no two dogs are trained the same. Every dog is unique, like humans, some are good at what they do while others aren't.
Due to a comment or two on here, I have been researching the use of police dogs in New Zealand.
The dogs can fail their training programme, or can be retired. Such dogs can be adopted, but it seems the new owner must get the dog castrated or spayed first.
-
It's impossible for scientists to confirm it. Scientific evidence isn't the gold standard you think it is though. Scientists have made mistakes and convictions have been overtrned.
Dog alerts can be used as circumstantial evidence when they are telling the same story as other evidence.
Science is the gold standard... There's nothing better... It's not perfect but it is still the gold standard. The problem is you reject science if you don't agree with it... Grime wants a scientific basis for the alerts... That's the right thing to do
-
It's impossible for scientists to confirm it. Scientific evidence isn't the gold standard you think it is though. Scientists have made mistakes and convictions have been overtrned.
Dog alerts can be used as circumstantial evidence when they are telling the same story as other evidence.
That is a circular argument IMO... As I said... Smithman saw Gerry.. Cadaver dog... Strong evidence.
Grime never mentioned anectdotal witness statements as corroboration until he went to the US... That's where he seems to have picked it up... That isn't what he was, saying in Luz
-
That is a circular argument IMO... As I said... Smithman saw Gerry.. Cadaver dog... Strong evidence.
Grime never mentioned anectdotal witness statements as corroboration until he went to the US... That's where he seems to have picked it up... That isn't what he was, saying in Luz
Smithman saw Gerry?
What did he do, look in the mirror?
-
Eddie wasn't since Grime had no access to human remains prior Maddie's disappearance. Didn't he make a video on a beach showing that he used some bone material to train his dogs in the UK?
No two dogs have the same ability and no two dogs are trained the same. Every dog is unique, like humans, some are good at what they do while others aren't.
EVRD used to be trained using swine (pigs) as their odour is the closest to that of humans. But most of the time, however, the dog was trained using the odour of a human cadaver. Operationally, the dog has ignored large amounts of animal remains/bones when locating human decomposition.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
The use of human remains for the purpose of training dogs in the U.K. is not acceptable at this point in time. The dog has however considerable experience in operational recovery of human remains and evidential forensic material and has trained exclusively using human remains in the U.S.A. in association with the F.B.I. The enhanced training of the dog involves the use of collection of 'Dead body scent' odour from corpses using remote technical equipment which does not contact.
The dog has never alerted to 'road kill'
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
-
EVRD used to be trained using swine (pigs) as their odour is the closest to that of humans. But most of the time, however, the dog was trained using the odour of a human cadaver. Operationally, the dog has ignored large amounts of animal remains/bones when locating human decomposition.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
The use of human remains for the purpose of training dogs in the U.K. is not acceptable at this point in time. The dog has however considerable experience in operational recovery of human remains and evidential forensic material and has trained exclusively using human remains in the U.S.A. in association with the F.B.I. The enhanced training of the dog involves the use of collection of 'Dead body scent' odour from corpses using remote technical equipment which does not contact.
The dog has never alerted to 'road kill'
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm
No one knows what Eddie alerts to if nothing is found
-
No one knows what Eddie alerts to if nothing is found
So effectively what you're saying is that you won't be fully satisfied until the dogs can speak English and also confirm that what they can smell is human cadaver. "Yes, Martin, don't talk to me like those other dumb mutts. As I said earlier, I can smell it in this cupboard and over there over by that couch. Can I have a biscuit now, you lying, extorting, perjuring embellisher?'
-
For these dogs the target scent is human decomposition... But they also alert to blood and decomposing pig...so there isn't a single well defined target scent
I still think if you read the White Paper properly you would say "decomposing blood" and not just "blood".
it is possible some cadaver dogs being trained on decomposing pig carcasses continue to alert to a decomposed pig carcass or porcine body parts but not mean from pigs remember.
-
Woman stands by boyfriend even after he ‘tossed her murdered baby nephew in trash’
https://metro.co.uk/2019/07/12/woman-stands-by-boyfriend-even-after-he-tossed-her-baby-nephews-corpse-in-trash-10225891/
Another child abducted from bed, found in the landfill. Imagine my surprise.
-
I still think if you read the White Paper properly you would say "decomposing blood" and not just "blood".
it is possible some cadaver dogs being trained on decomposing pig carcasses continue to alert to a decomposed pig carcass or porcine body parts but not mean from pigs remember.
Grime uses the word blood in his statements... And also in the white paper so I'll stick to blood
-
Grime uses the word blood in his statements... And also in the white paper so I'll stick to blood
Only because he had previously defined it as decomposed blood.
-
Only because he had previously defined it as decomposed blood.
Gotta describe technical stuff in layman terms when giving statements.
-
Woman stands by boyfriend even after he ‘tossed her murdered baby nephew in trash’
https://metro.co.uk/2019/07/12/woman-stands-by-boyfriend-even-after-he-tossed-her-baby-nephews-corpse-in-trash-10225891/
Another child abducted from bed, found in the landfill. Imagine my surprise.
Interesting find. Thanks for flagging it up.
-
Only because he had previously defined it as decomposed blood.
The dogs alert to dried blood ...
-
The dogs alert to dried blood ...
Not urine?
-
So effectively what you're saying is that you won't be fully satisfied until the dogs can speak English and also confirm that what they can smell is human cadaver. "Yes, Martin, don't talk to me like those other dumb mutts. As I said earlier, I can smell it in this cupboard and over there over by that couch. Can I have a biscuit now, you lying, extorting, perjuring embellisher?'
It's quite simple really.The McCanns said cadaver dogs are unreliable. Therefore those who support them agree and will never accept that they're wrong imo.
-
It's quite simple really.The McCanns said cadaver dogs are unreliable. Therefore those who support them agree and will never accept that they're wrong imo.
I know and that's fine. Davros wants scientific certainty, that's also fine. But the courts are working on 'beyond reasonable doubt' and that's the important 'gold standard'. They're a detection tool and that's what they're used for - to great effect.
-
I know and that's fine. Davros wants scientific certainty, that's also fine. But the courts are working on 'beyond reasonable doubt' and that's the important 'gold standard'. They're a detection tool and that's what they're used for - to great effect.
"Beyond all reasonable doubt" isn't as high a standard as "beyond all doubt" as Davel wants it to be.
-
No one knows what Eddie alerts to if nothing is found
Tell that to SY who used cadaver dogs and spent millions looking for a body. What are you playing at SY! Why would you think a proven cadaver dog was alerting to cadaver scent! *%87
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/6/3/1401811436562/Scotland-Yard-detectives--006.jpg?width=700&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=bb70a18761d525b481005fe456e6f9f2)
-
"Beyond all reasonable doubt" isn't as high a standard as "beyond all doubt" as Davel wants it to be.
Even science relies on theories and uses them as a standard. The Big Bang is a theory. Evolution. Quantum. Relativity. All postulated and only a theory until proven. Dogs can't talk but alert to what they're trained to alert. In the meantime we use them.
Good evening.
-
It's quite simple really.The McCanns said cadaver dogs are unreliable. Therefore those who support them agree and will never accept that they're wrong imo.
Grime has said the alerts have no evidential reliability so it's grime who is in effect saying the alerts, are not reliable
-
I know and that's fine. Davros wants scientific certainty, that's also fine. But the courts are working on 'beyond reasonable doubt' and that's the important 'gold standard'. They're a detection tool and that's what they're used for - to great effect.
Thrs no such thing as scientific certainty...
-
It's Grime and Stockham who have called for more scientific testing
-
"Beyond all reasonable doubt" isn't as high a standard as "beyond all doubt" as Davel wants it to be.
Wrong again Rob... There basically no such thing as, beyond all doubt and I've never expected it
-
Only because he had previously defined it as decomposed blood.
I haven't seen anywhere grime define the detection to decomposed blood...
If you are going to contradict me you need to provide a cite... I doubt you will have one.
-
I haven't seen anywhere grime define the detection to decomposed blood...
If you are going to contradict me you need to provide a cite... I doubt you will have one.
Can anyone tell me how I can cut and paste from that white paper?
-
Can you tell me how I can cut a paste from that white paper?
You can't... Tell me which page... According to you grime makes the definition early on... I think you are wrong...grime has said the dogs react to dried blood...
-
Can anyone tell me how I can cut and paste from that white paper?
And it would be copy and paste.... Not cut
-
Wrong again Rob... There basically no such thing as, beyond all doubt and I've never expected it
Well it seems like it all the same.
And it would be copy and paste.... Not cut
OK I am a bit sleepy ATM. Sorry about that. It is such a long document and hard to define where things are in it. I'm sure I've seen it, and I double checked that I was reading it right. It is in the white paper in the first 12 pages, and that's about as close as I can get at the moment.
-
Well it seems like it all the same.
OK I am a bit sleepy ATM. Sorry about that. It is such a long document and hard to define where things are in it. I'm sure I've seen it, and I double checked that I was reading it right. It is in the white paper in the first 12 pages, and that's about as close as I can get at the moment.
You shouldn't really contradict a poster unless you are sure... On page 3 and 7 grime refers to blood not decomposed blood... The dogs react to blood dried in situ... According to Grimes statement in Luz... I think you are mistaken
-
It's quite simple really.The McCanns said cadaver dogs are unreliable. Therefore those who support them agree and will never accept that they're wrong imo.
And McCann sceptics believe Grime’s dogs “don’t lie” and will never accept that they may not have alerted to Madeleine’s cadaver or indeed any cadaver at all.
-
Well it seems like it all the same.
OK I am a bit sleepy ATM. Sorry about that. It is such a long document and hard to define where things are in it. I'm sure I've seen it, and I double checked that I was reading it right. It is in the white paper in the first 12 pages, and that's about as close as I can get at the moment.
It might seem to you... But you would be wrong.
I've never said I want proof beyond all doubt... I've suggested scientific validation... As Grime has suggested too
-
Well it seems like it all the same.
OK I am a bit sleepy ATM. Sorry about that. It is such a long document and hard to define where things are in it. I'm sure I've seen it, and I double checked that I was reading it right. It is in the white paper in the first 12 pages, and that's about as close as I can get at the moment.
Please dint continually demand cites from me... And remove my post... When you fail to provide cites fir your claim
-
Please dint continually demand cites from me... And remove my post... When you fail to provide cites fir your claim
Look it would take a week to read that white paper and you expect me to provide a cite instantaneously. I have not refused to provide the cite you require. Just don't be so impatient.
-
Look it would take a week to read that white paper and you expect me to provide a cite instantaneously. I have not refused to provide the cite you require. Just don't be so impatient.
It doesn't take a week to read it... You said it's in the first 12 pages... Let's see if you provide a cite
I've read the first 12 pages... It isn't there
-
It doesn't take a week to read it... You said it's in the first 12 pages... Let's see if you provide a cite
I'm busy so if I say it would take a week to read it will take at least a week to read. In fact I can barely make myself take the punishment of reading it to be honest. Did you enjoy reading it?
-
I'm busy so if I say it would take a week to read it will take at least a week to read. In fact I can barely make myself take the punishment of reading it to be honest. Did you enjoy reading it?
Have you got the name and the link again?
-
I'm busy so if I say it would take a week to read it will take at least a week to read. In fact I can barely make myself take the punishment of reading it to be honest. Did you enjoy reading it?
You said it's in the first 12 pages... It isn't.. You are wrong and should remove your post..
-
Have you got the name and the link again?
http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/1/Forensic%20Canine%20Foundation%20.pdf
-
if you open the document and search for the word blood, the 3rd occasion it has this sentence " .... and locate the odours of decomposing flesh , bone and blood, ...."
The word "decomposing" covers all three types of tissue; flesh, bone and blood.
-
if you open the document and search for the word blood, the 3rd occasion it has this sentence " .... and locate the odours of decomposing flesh , bone and blood, ...."
The word "decomposing" covers all three types of tissue; flesh, bone and blood.
No it doesn't... That's just your interpretation... And IMO its wrong
-
if you open the document and search for the word blood, the 5th occasion it has this sentence " .... human decomposition odour that is the result of direct or indirect contact transference in the absence of recoverable human remains or blood."
You will only get that odour if the flesh bone or blood is decomposed.
-
No it doesn't... That's just your interpretation... And IMO its wrong
Let the forum decide.
-
Let the forum decide.
I dont really care...you are posting your opinion as fact...and imo you are totally mistaken
-
Let the forum decide.
You've got my vote. &^^&*
-
I dont really care...you are posting your opinion as fact...and imo you are totally mistaken
I've quoted directly from the White paper. The word blood appears 91 times and I have not explored all of the instances but I welcome you to show me a quote which contradicts the 2 cites I have given you.
-
You've got my vote. &^^&*
for whast its worth..another poster who is mistaken. The dogs alert ro blood...blood that has dried in situ...according to grime......grime never uses the phrase decomposing blood
-
I've quoted directly from the White paper. The word blood appears 91 times and I have not explored all of the instances but I welcome you to show me a quote which contradicts the 2 cites I have given you.
you havent given a cite relating to "decomposed blood"....youve given your opinin that grime is referring to decomposed blood
im absolutely certain you are totally mistaken..as is sil...
-
for whast its worth..another poster who is mistaken. The dogs alert ro blood...blood that has dried in situ...according to grime......grime never uses the phrase decomposing blood
That was Keela's forte not Eddie's. Find a cite that proves your point then, from the White paper.
-
if you open the document and search for the word blood, the 5th occasion it has this sentence " .... human decomposition odour that is the result of direct or indirect contact transference in the absence of recoverable human remains or blood."
You will only get that odour if the flesh bone or blood is decomposed.
eddie reacts to blood from a living person that has dried in situ...not decomposed blood.
-
That was Keela's forte not Eddie's. Find a cite that proves your point then, from the White paper.
eddie and keela both respond to blood from a livinfg person. you are totally mistaken..imo
I shall continue to post eddie alerts to blood ...as confirmed by grime
-
if you open the document and search for the word blood, the 7th occasion it has this sentence talking about EVRD dogs "This type of dog may detect human blood as a sub-set of human decomposition."
-
eddie and keela both respond to blood from a livinfg person. you are totally mistaken..imo
I shall continue to post eddie alerts to blood ...as confirmed by grime
I don't want your opinion anymore I want your cite.
-
if you open the document and search for the word blood, the 7th occasion it has this sentence talking about EVRD dogs "This type of dog may detect human blood as a sub-set of human decomposition."
That is rather interesting as dried blood then is a form of decomposed blood. Whereas I think in terms of putrefied blood but this is not absolutely necessary.
So are we both right in that dried blood is decomposed blood.
-
for whast its worth..another poster who is mistaken. The dogs alert ro blood...blood that has dried in situ...according to grime......grime never uses the phrase decomposing blood
As opposed to blood that is dried elsewhere and carried to the scene?
-
I don't want your opinion anymore I want your cite.
'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.
eddie alerts to blood from a live person...as in the blood on the key card
-
As opposed to blood that is dried elsewhere and carried to the scene?
I think it's, self explanatory
-
It's quite simple really.The McCanns said cadaver dogs are unreliable. Therefore those who support them agree and will never accept that they're wrong imo.
Which brings up that ole question as to why the parents laughed off the dogs and not showed some concern that their daughter could have been killed in the apartment and hidden there, for some reason. Their behaviour is very telling. Their emphatic denial about their daughter wakeing and wandering does suggest they KNOW that didn't happen.
-
Which brings up that ole question as to why the parents laughed off the dogs and not showed some concern that their daughter could have been killed in the apartment and hidden there, for some reason. Their behaviour is very telling. Their emphatic denial about their daughter wakeing and wandering does suggest they KNOW that didn't happen.
Given Jane's sighting it raises the question of why no-one thought of concentrating their searches in the direction taken by Tannerman.
-
'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.
eddie alerts to blood from a live person...as in the blood on the key card
OK, where to now?
-
OK, where to now?
Where to... To the fact that it's perfectly acceptable to say Eddie alerts to blood... Despite the, 20 posts arguing the point
-
Where to... To the fact that it's perfectly acceptable to say Eddie alerts to blood... Despite the, 20 posts arguing the point
As MG writes:
"Dried blood is a subset of human decomposition", so yes it appears as MG trains some of his dogs to alert to cadaver odour of "decomposed flesh, bones and blood". No alerts to fresh blood.
I had to assume that the bones were decomposed too.
-
Do we both agree with Martin Grime?
-
As MG writes:
"Dried blood is a subset of human decomposition", so yes it appears as MG trains some of his dogs to alert to cadaver odour of "decomposed flesh, bones and blood". No alerts to fresh blood.
I had to assume that the bones were decomposed too.
Eddie alerts to dried blood from a living person... I said the dog alerted to blood.. You tried to correct me
I'm right in saying the dog alerts to blood... That's it... No need fir continued pointless arguing
-
Eddie alerts to dried blood from a living person... I said the dog alerted to blood.. You tried to correct me
I'm right in saying the dog alerts to blood... That's it... No need fir continued pointless arguing
No Grime makes the point the blood has to be dried. The dried blood could be from a victim who is either dead or alive at the time of the find.
"Eddie alerts to dried blood from a living person" or a deceased person.
Davel: " I said the dog alerted to blood.. You tried to correct me." Yes because you didn't use the word "dried" to make it clear it wasn't fresh blood.
Davel: "I'm right in saying the dog alerts to blood... That's it... No need fir continued pointless arguing" Maybe so as long as you agree with Grime that the blood in question was dried not fresh.
-
No Grime makes the point the blood has to be dried. The dried blood could be from a victim who is either dead or alive at the time of the find.
"Eddie alerts to dried blood from a living person" or a deceased person.
Davel: " I said the dog alerted to blood.. You tried to correct me." Yes because you didn't use the word "dried" to make it clear it wasn't fresh blood.
Davel: "I'm right in saying the dog alerts to blood... That's it... No need fir continued pointless arguing" Maybe so as long as you agree with Grime that the blood in question was dried not fresh.
My post says dried blood..
-
Which brings up that ole question as to why the parents laughed off the dogs and not showed some concern that their daughter could have been killed in the apartment and hidden there, for some reason. Their behaviour is very telling. Their emphatic denial about their daughter wakeing and wandering does suggest they KNOW that didn't happen.
How would Madeleine have been hidden there? They searched the whole apartment after Kate give the alert.
-
How would Madeleine have been hidden there? They searched the whole apartment after Kate give the alert.
In which case she must have been moved by that point.
-
My post says dried blood..
You wrote: "Eddie alerts to dried blood from a living person... I said the dog alerted to blood.. You tried to correct me
I'm right in saying the dog alerts to blood... That's it... No need fir continued pointless arguing"
There are so many ellipses in that that I have no idea what you are trying to say. Say it as complete sentences and I will get what you mean.
-
In which case she must have been moved by that point.
Either that or the search of the whole apartment wasn't thorough enough.
-
You wrote: "Eddie alerts to dried blood from a living person... I said the dog alerted to blood.. You tried to correct me
I'm right in saying the dog alerts to blood... That's it... No need fir continued pointless arguing"
There are so many ellipses in that that I have no idea what you are trying to say. Say it as complete sentences and I will get what you mean.
I'm not really bothered whether you understand or not
-
I'm not really bothered whether you understand or not
Thank God for that. What I am interested in is making sure the posts in the forum are correct, truthful and factual. Posts that are ambiguous could be libel to deletion.
-
Thank God for that. What I am interested in is making sure the posts in the forum are correct, truthful and factual. Posts that are ambiguous could be libel to deletion.
I'd best keep a copy of my posts in case they are unfairly deleted as it, seems you don't understand the use of elipses
-
I'd best keep a copy of my posts in case they are unfairly deleted as it, seems you don't understand the use of eclipses
Wow
-
Either that or the search of the whole apartment wasn't thorough enough.
This is a bone of contention which makes rubbish of the 'abduction' claims.
IF YOU KNEW your daughter was abducted do you really leave your children,run out along a path tell your friends and go search the apartment? what for? she has been 'abducted' which means = SHE ISN'T THERE! come on people seriously.
If the abduction theory is to be given any credance, we aslo have to look at the time this may have happened.
there was NO physical checks on the children since they were left by the parents going to dinner. (I know what Gerry is claiming but it is not something I believe happened- for many reasons).
Therfore a huge gap for MBM to be taken so WHY search the apartment, she could have been away hours ago.
If we do give credance to Gerrys 'loving father moment', this means the abducter was jemmying the bloody window as Gerry was in the apartment, becasue JT saw the child being carried away as the father had just left the apartment.
JT's sighting is the prefered choice of the McCanns. I would love to hear the excuses if this was asked by a proscecutor in a trial. I will just have to make do with the supporters excused made on the Parents behalf ^*&&
-
"I will just have to make do with the supporters excused made on theor behalf "
Was that "I will just have to make do with the supporters excuses made on their [Tapas 9's] behalf"?
-
Exhibit A and the Trial of D'Andre Lane.
-
Exhibit A and the Trial of D'Andre Lane.
Do'H!
See this is what happens when dogs are on every thread!
-
Do'H!
See this is what happens when dogs are on every thread!
But for sure the dogs were involved in the trial of D'Andre Lane.
-
Do'H!
See this is what happens when dogs are on every thread!
Some people do seem obsessed by them. Strange, considering their so-called irrelevance.
-
Some people do seem obsessed by them. Strange, considering their so-called irrelevance.
Some people seem obsessed with tiny differences in the statements... And in fact every word the mccanns utter.
-
This is a bone of contention which makes rubbish of the 'abduction' claims.
IF YOU KNEW your daughter was abducted do you really leave your children,run out along a path tell your friends and go search the apartment? what for? she has been 'abducted' which means = SHE ISN'T THERE! come on people seriously.
If the abduction theory is to be given any credance, we aslo have to look at the time this may have happened.
there was NO physical checks on the children since they were left by the parents going to dinner. (I know what Gerry is claiming but it is not something I believe happened- for many reasons).
Therfore a huge gap for MBM to be taken so WHY search the apartment, she could have been away hours ago.
If we do give credance to Gerrys 'loving father moment', this means the abducter was jemmying the bloody window as Gerry was in the apartment, becasue JT saw the child being carried away as the father had just left the apartment.
JT's sighting is the prefered choice of the McCanns. I would love to hear the excuses if this was asked by a proscecutor in a trial. I will just have to make do with the supporters excused made on the Parents behalf ^*&&
No it does not mean the abductor was jemmying the bloody window as Gerry was in the apartment, what a stupid comment IMO.
-
No it does not mean the abductor was jemmying the bloody window as Gerry was in the apartment, what a stupid comment IMO.
If we're taking the Tanner sighting to be the abductor it does.
Though we now know that Tanner didn't see the abductor- but rather a British tourist (walking a strange way back from the creche, and carrying his daughter like no-one else does!!)
-
If we're taking the Tanner sighting to be the abductor it does.
Though we now know that Tanner didn't see the abductor- but rather a British tourist (walking a strange way back from the creche, and carrying his daughter like no-one else does!!)
If the abductor was in thew room or apartment when Gerry was there, how would he get out?
Can you carry a child out that window? Maybe he could get out and then pick Madeleine up off the spare bed. She would have to be real sleepy to do that and not wake up.
-
If the abductor was in thew room or apartment when Gerry was there, how would he get out?
Can you carry a child out that window? Maybe he could get out and then pick Madeleine up off the spare bed. She would have to be real sleepy to do that and not wake up.
What do vets give to dogs when they want to sedate them for a minor procedure e.g. an inner ear examination followed by the removal of a foreign object lodged there?
My dog matches the size (in length) and weight of Madeleine and he was zonked for hours after his trip to the vet.
-
If we're taking the Tanner sighting to be the abductor it does.
Though we now know that Tanner didn't see the abductor- but rather a British tourist (walking a strange way back from the creche, and carrying his daughter like no-one else does!!)
How does it? How many minutes had Gerry and Jez been talking together when Tannerman was seen? How long does it take to enter an unlocked apartment and take a child?
-
What do vets give to dogs when they want to sedate them for a minor procedure e.g. an inner ear examination followed by the removal of a foreign object lodged there?
My dog matches the size (in length) and weight of Madeleine and he was zonked for hours after his trip to the vet.
I haven't worked in clinical practice for 30+ years sorry.
-
What do vets give to dogs when they want to sedate them for a minor procedure e.g. an inner ear examination followed by the removal of a foreign object lodged there?
My dog matches the size (in length) and weight of Madeleine and he was zonked for hours after his trip to the vet.
I think its a GA....induction with a barbiturate and maintainence with n2o plus something like fluothane...which would nean your dog wasnt sedated
-
I think its a GA....induction with a barbiturate and maintainence with n2o plus something like fluothane...which would nean your dog wasnt sedated
We used to use ACP tablet by mouth prior to anaesthesia, but what was clear that dogs like spaniels with big floppy lips could end up with the tablet dissolving in their mouth and those ones would become real dopey for hours.
-
I think its a GA....induction with a barbiturate and maintainence with n2o plus something like fluothane...which would nean your dog wasnt sedated
Nowadays it’s that but Propofol as the induction agent and sevoflurane (plus O2 / N2O). For human sedation the drug of choice is normally midazolam. This couldn’t have been used on May 3rd though - unless the abducter was great at IV cannulation. IM or buccal takes too long to work... IMO phenergan would have been used if MM was sedated.
-
If the abductor was in thew room or apartment when Gerry was there, how would he get out?
Can you carry a child out that window? Maybe he could get out and then pick Madeleine up off the spare bed. She would have to be real sleepy to do that and not wake up.
The evidence suggests that just did not happen.
-
Nowadays it’s that but Propofol as the induction agent and sevoflurane (plus O2 / N2O). For human sedation the drug of choice is normally midazolam. This couldn’t have been used on May 3rd though - unless the abducter was great at IV cannulation. IM or buccal takes too long to work... IMO phenergan would have been used if MM was sedated.
propofol is also used for sedation...what about ketamine
-
Nowadays it’s that but Propofol as the induction agent and sevoflurane (plus O2 / N2O). For human sedation the drug of choice is normally midazolam. This couldn’t have been used on May 3rd though - unless the abducter was great at IV cannulation. IM or buccal takes too long to work... IMO phenergan would have been used if MM was sedated.
How would you get the phenergan into the child? I recall that came in glass vials that we'd have to open with a file and crack the top off. Then draw it up in a syringe. So would she have been jabbed while asleep?
-
How would you get the phenergan into the child? I recall that came in glass vials that we'd have to open with a file and crack the top off. Then draw it up in a syringe. So would she have been jabbed while asleep?
its a medicine...oral
-
its a medicine...oral
That would be even harder in a child that was asleep. How do you make them swallow that? Medicine is that Pills or liquid? ("Medicine" seems more like a sweet syrup that is swallowed.)
-
That would be even harder in a child that was asleep. How do you make them swallow that? Medicine is that Pills or liquid? ("Medicine" seems more like a sweet syrup that is swallowed.)
sceptics suggest it was the mccanns who sedated the children...so as a medicine
-
sceptics suggest it was the mccanns who sedated the children...so as a medicine
But what is a medicine:
"medicine
noun
1.
the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease (in technical use often taken to exclude surgery).
"he made distinguished contributions to pathology and medicine"
synonyms: medical science, practice of medicine, healing, therapeutics, therapy, treatment, healing art
"the remarkable achievements of modern medicine"
2.
a drug or other preparation for the treatment or prevention of disease.
"give her some medicine"
synonyms: medication, medicament, remedy, cure, nostrum, patent medicine, quack remedy, panacea, cure-all, placebo, drug, prescription, dose, treatment;"
So medicine could be by many routes - e.g by injection or oral as a liquid, pill, or powder.
-
But what is a medicine:
"medicine
noun
1.
the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease (in technical use often taken to exclude surgery).
"he made distinguished contributions to pathology and medicine"
synonyms: medical science, practice of medicine, healing, therapeutics, therapy, treatment, healing art
"the remarkable achievements of modern medicine"
2.
a drug or other preparation for the treatment or prevention of disease.
"give her some medicine"
synonyms: medication, medicament, remedy, cure, nostrum, patent medicine, quack remedy, panacea, cure-all, placebo, drug, prescription, dose, treatment;"
So medicine could be by many routes - e.g by injection or oral as a liquid, pill, or powder.
in the Uk...a pill is a pill...and a medicine is a liquid