i don't think this is off topic too much, but why did the dogs who are trained to follow live scents, fail to find Madeleines scent on both the route that Jane Tanner says she saw a man walking with a child and the Smiths.
i mean there is no evidence Madeleine was the child seen by either of them.
Thanks DA but isnt't the point the dogs would have followed the scent of the child? Wherever it went?
Goodnight all.
Thanks DA but isnt't the point the dogs would have followed the scent of the child? Wherever it went?
Goodnight all.
Well I have a different take on this.Thats a handy but ultimately useless theory LOL. So where did his sweaty hands scent end up? In the direction of Jane Tanner or the Smith sightings?Ha Ha you are very funny. C u.
Budlemans lifter must have handled Madeleines blanket to move her and possibly to wipe his sweaty hands. His sweaty smell would be the over-riding smell on that blanket. I think the dogs (GNR weren't they?) followed his smell rather than Madeleines
Well I have a different take on this.
Budlemans lifter must have handled Madeleines blanket to move her and possibly to wipe his sweaty hands. His sweaty smell would be the over-riding smell on that blanket. I think the dogs (GNR weren't they?) followed his smell rather than Madeleines
Well I have a different take on this.
Budlemans lifter must have handled Madeleines blanket to move her and possibly to wipe his sweaty hands. His sweaty smell would be the over-riding smell on that blanket. I think the dogs (GNR weren't they?) followed his smell rather than Madeleines
And you are certain that he was sweating how ?
Well I have a different take on this.
Budlemans lifter must have handled Madeleines blanket to move her and possibly to wipe his sweaty hands. His sweaty smell would be the over-riding smell on that blanket. I think the dogs (GNR weren't they?) followed his smell rather than Madeleines
And you are certain that he was sweating how ?
You are quite right DA,
... but the chances are that he/she was covered in nervous sweat and probably fag smoke
and I bet that smell would override Madeleines scent.
and I bet that smell would override Madeleines scent.
I think this, from the GNR report, pretty much confirms my view that the GNR officers didn't have the right type of dogs at their disposal:
On 7th May the same searches were continued, being extended to to the entire northern part of Almadena to the site of Espojeiro and the verges of the EN125 until the Boi valley.
At about 19.. the undersigned officer, accompanied by the Commander, Officer Silva, took part in a meetings with the PJ Directorate, being asked by the PJ about the viability of giving the girl's clothes to the dogs for the dogs to sniff again, and if by means of the odour inhaled, they would be able to mark an identical odour in one of the resort apartments even though its door was closed.
With regard to this task, Officer Silva referred to the fact that the time that had passed would be a crucial condition for the dogs' work in obtaining results and that the entirety of the human odours existing in the apartments and access paths could make the dogs' searches very difficult. However, in spite of not being a normal situation for tracking, it could be attempted, whilst the operation should be carried out as quickly as possible and not directed towards one but to all the apartments in the resort, it being appropriate for the handler not to know which apartment was chosen, so as not the be conditioned.
Note, also, the reference in the quote to the possibility of bias distorting a handler's judgment and precaution against that.
Then think of Grime and those 'Madeleine' stickers on the back of the Renault.
I think the Portuguese dog handlers were much more professional than Grime ...
Note, also, the reference in the quote to the possibility of bias distorting a handler's judgment and precaution against that.
Then think of Grime and those 'Madeleine' stickers on the back of the Renault.
I think the Portuguese dog handlers were much more professional than Grime ...
Certainly he knew which car was used by the suspects. Why do you think he stood there calling Eddie back when it wasn't that interested whereas he called him away from other vehicles. Poor show without a doubt.
Certainly he knew which car was used by the suspects. Why do you think he stood there calling Eddie back when it wasn't that interested whereas he called him away from other vehicles. Poor show without a doubt.
That doesn't prove anything. It's a supposition you're making. How do you know that the dog "wasn't that interested"? Are you an expert on canine body language? Oh hang on, I forgot - you're the dog expert who could do better than Grime, aren't you? 'Nuff said.
The Interesting thing about the car is that someone actually noticed half way through that the posters were there, and not a particularly good idea. This alone points to gross incompetence on someone's part, but a bit too late by then.
But I can't help wondering if they considered doing a rerun.
The Interesting thing about the car is that someone actually noticed half way through that the posters were there, and not a particularly good idea. This alone points to gross incompetence on someone's part, but a bit too late by then.
But I can't help wondering if they considered doing a rerun.
They tampered with the evidence Eleanor. How many other objects did they tamper with? Did you know that the clothing had been laid out originally on a dirty floor and had to be removed for a second attempt? You couldn't make it up if you tried. @)(++(*
Eddie was also used to search down town and on the beach and found nada.
Thank you, Angelo. Just what I've been waiting for.
The Interesting thing about the car is that someone actually noticed half way through that the posters were there, and not a particularly good idea. This alone points to gross incompetence on someone's part, but a bit too late by then.
But I can't help wondering if they considered doing a rerun.
They tampered with the evidence Eleanor. How many other objects did they tamper with? Did you know that the clothing had been laid out originally on a dirty floor and had to be removed for a second attempt? You couldn't make it up if you tried. @)(++(*
Eddie was also used to search down town and on the beach and found nada.
In so far as I understood things, the dogs were sent to PdL to search the beach and surrounding areas to see if they could find Madeleine's body. Which they might have done if it was there.
Deploying them in the appartment and other places of residence was the idea of The PJ, ie. Amaral, three months after the event, and after multiple reoccupations. The dogs were never going to find anything usable in a Court of Law. So therefor it was a complete waste of time and money. Except for Martin Grime, of course. Who then used the videos to convince The Jersey Team. For which Mr. Grime pocketed £93,000.
In so far as I understood things, the dogs were sent to PdL to search the beach and surrounding areas to see if they could find Madeleine's body. Which they might have done if it was there.
Deploying them in the appartment and other places of residence was the idea of The PJ, ie. Amaral, three months after the event, and after multiple reoccupations. The dogs were never going to find anything usable in a Court of Law. So therefor it was a complete waste of time and money. Except for Martin Grime, of course. Who then used the videos to convince The Jersey Team. For which Mr. Grime pocketed £93,000.
Just remind me what Grime's dogs went on to do in America again...?
In so far as I understood things, the dogs were sent to PdL to search the beach and surrounding areas to see if they could find Madeleine's body. Which they might have done if it was there.
Deploying them in the appartment and other places of residence was the idea of The PJ, ie. Amaral, three months after the event, and after multiple reoccupations. The dogs were never going to find anything usable in a Court of Law. So therefor it was a complete waste of time and money. Except for Martin Grime, of course. Who then used the videos to convince The Jersey Team. For which Mr. Grime pocketed £93,000.
Just remind me what Grime's dogs went on to do in America again...?
Which dogs are we talking about? And have they actually found any Corpses?
In so far as I understood things, the dogs were sent to PdL to search the beach and surrounding areas to see if they could find Madeleine's body. Which they might have done if it was there.
Deploying them in the appartment and other places of residence was the idea of The PJ, ie. Amaral, three months after the event, and after multiple reoccupations. The dogs were never going to find anything usable in a Court of Law. So therefor it was a complete waste of time and money. Except for Martin Grime, of course. Who then used the videos to convince The Jersey Team. For which Mr. Grime pocketed £93,000.
Just remind me what Grime's dogs went on to do in America again...?
Which dogs are we talking about? And have they actually found any Corpses?
Yay! Another one I can ignore from now. Seriously, I cannot believe you've said that.
Thank you, Angelo. Just what I've been waiting for.
The Interesting thing about the car is that someone actually noticed half way through that the posters were there, and not a particularly good idea. This alone points to gross incompetence on someone's part, but a bit too late by then.
But I can't help wondering if they considered doing a rerun.
They tampered with the evidence Eleanor. How many other objects did they tamper with? Did you know that the clothing had been laid out originally on a dirty floor and had to be removed for a second attempt? You couldn't make it up if you tried. @)(++(*
Eddie was also used to search down town and on the beach and found nada.
To avoid contamination of evidence that will be gathered at the McCanns', Mark Harrison has insisted on the availability of decontaminated premises exclusively set aside for this purpose. Julio Barroso, mayor of Lagos, agrees to lend us the garage of a new, unoccupied building in the centre of Lagos. The place is cleaned from top to bottom.
The soft toy and all the clothes from the house are placed into boxes specially made to preserve evidence. These objects are then conveyed to the decontaminated premises. They are placed on the ground, a good distance apart for the dogs to examine.
At 8pm, Tavares de Almeida calls me to let me know that Mark Harrison requires another place because this one is not sufficiently clean.
- How do I find a place at this kind of time?
- Sort it out!
Julio Barroso offers us the new sports hall in Lagos which, finally, meets the required standards. The objects are once again laid out on the ground and the dogs can start. Eddie alerts us to a strong cadaver odour on some of Kate's clothes, but the CSI dog doesn't detect the slightest trace of blood.
Doesn't need checking out, Carana.Thank you, Angelo. Just what I've been waiting for.
The Interesting thing about the car is that someone actually noticed half way through that the posters were there, and not a particularly good idea. This alone points to gross incompetence on someone's part, but a bit too late by then.
But I can't help wondering if they considered doing a rerun.
They tampered with the evidence Eleanor. How many other objects did they tamper with? Did you know that the clothing had been laid out originally on a dirty floor and had to be removed for a second attempt? You couldn't make it up if you tried. @)(++(*
Eddie was also used to search down town and on the beach and found nada.
To avoid contamination of evidence that will be gathered at the McCanns', Mark Harrison has insisted on the availability of decontaminated premises exclusively set aside for this purpose. Julio Barroso, mayor of Lagos, agrees to lend us the garage of a new, unoccupied building in the centre of Lagos. The place is cleaned from top to bottom.
The soft toy and all the clothes from the house are placed into boxes specially made to preserve evidence. These objects are then conveyed to the decontaminated premises. They are placed on the ground, a good distance apart for the dogs to examine.
At 8pm, Tavares de Almeida calls me to let me know that Mark Harrison requires another place because this one is not sufficiently clean.
- How do I find a place at this kind of time?
- Sort it out!
Julio Barroso offers us the new sports hall in Lagos which, finally, meets the required standards. The objects are once again laid out on the ground and the dogs can start. Eddie alerts us to a strong cadaver odour on some of Kate's clothes, but the CSI dog doesn't detect the slightest trace of blood.
I'm not sure about this. Could a PT speaker please check the original PT version?
There could be a misinterpretation that they had already been laid out and repacked as opposed to where they were intially intended to be laid out.
Doesn't need checking out, Carana.Thank you, Angelo. Just what I've been waiting for.
The Interesting thing about the car is that someone actually noticed half way through that the posters were there, and not a particularly good idea. This alone points to gross incompetence on someone's part, but a bit too late by then.
But I can't help wondering if they considered doing a rerun.
They tampered with the evidence Eleanor. How many other objects did they tamper with? Did you know that the clothing had been laid out originally on a dirty floor and had to be removed for a second attempt? You couldn't make it up if you tried. @)(++(*
Eddie was also used to search down town and on the beach and found nada.
To avoid contamination of evidence that will be gathered at the McCanns', Mark Harrison has insisted on the availability of decontaminated premises exclusively set aside for this purpose. Julio Barroso, mayor of Lagos, agrees to lend us the garage of a new, unoccupied building in the centre of Lagos. The place is cleaned from top to bottom.
The soft toy and all the clothes from the house are placed into boxes specially made to preserve evidence. These objects are then conveyed to the decontaminated premises. They are placed on the ground, a good distance apart for the dogs to examine.
At 8pm, Tavares de Almeida calls me to let me know that Mark Harrison requires another place because this one is not sufficiently clean.
- How do I find a place at this kind of time?
- Sort it out!
Julio Barroso offers us the new sports hall in Lagos which, finally, meets the required standards. The objects are once again laid out on the ground and the dogs can start. Eddie alerts us to a strong cadaver odour on some of Kate's clothes, but the CSI dog doesn't detect the slightest trace of blood.
I'm not sure about this. Could a PT speaker please check the original PT version?
There could be a misinterpretation that they had already been laid out and repacked as opposed to where they were intially intended to be laid out.
Its from Gonc's book, he said it @)(++(* .
He used a manky garage first, then the sweaty sports hall.
Carana wreaks fearful havoc with my stomach ulcers when she gets on to the subject of comparative translations of extracts from Amaral's book ....
Try Anna Esse translation.
Chapter 16
http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.co.uk/2009/09/goncalo-amaral-maddie-lenquete_12.html
In so far as I understood things, the dogs were sent to PdL to search the beach and surrounding areas to see if they could find Madeleine's body. Which they might have done if it was there.
Deploying them in the appartment and other places of residence was the idea of The PJ, ie. Amaral, three months after the event, and after multiple reoccupations.
It was intended to be more tongue-in-cheek than a serious point ...
Thanks Carana for the translations, also it would havebeen recorded on video if two places had been used to lay out the clothes as all the searches were videod top to bottom for five hours
I better log off because it seems no one apart from me is posting tonight, looks like I have taken over the forum. hit ai did have to respond to a bunch of threads from last night.
Bye
Thanks to the member who posted Amaral's groveling excuses as to why the poorly resourced Praia da Luz police were impeded in their efforts to find Maddie. Let this be a warning to anyone who visits these countries with young children. Take your eyes off them at your peril.
Well I have a different take on this.
Budlemans lifter must have handled Madeleines blanket to move her and possibly to wipe his sweaty hands. His sweaty smell would be the over-riding smell on that blanket. I think the dogs (GNR weren't they?) followed his smell rather than Madeleines
Well I have a different take on this.
Budlemans lifter must have handled Madeleines blanket to move her and possibly to wipe his sweaty hands. His sweaty smell would be the over-riding smell on that blanket. I think the dogs (GNR weren't they?) followed his smell rather than Madeleines
No they weren't GNR dogs, they are a special canine squad that have helped many victims not only in Portugal but also in other countries (they have been in the 911, in the huge Greek earthquake, in Haiti,...just to mention a couple). If they had been given a piece of Madeleine's clothing they would follow her and not a sweaty pretense abductor.
I think you miss the salient point.
It doesn't matter whether Amaral meant specially designed boxes or not.
It doesn't even matter that (what we know from the evidence of our own eyes) bulk standard cardboard boxes were used.
At the time of the inspection, months after the crime, it was way past too late to worry about cross contamination. The clothes, by then will have been packed into suitcases, put on wardrobe shelves, put through washing machines and heaven knows what else. Cross-contamination, if it was going to occur, would, by then, long since already have occurred, and taking (retrospective) precautions would have been a classic case of bolted horses and barn doors.
The salient question is why was there an inspection at the villa? And why was there a further inspection at the gym?
There is not a single logical, coherent, or consistent explanation of either inspection.
Well I have a different take on this.
Budlemans lifter must have handled Madeleines blanket to move her and possibly to wipe his sweaty hands. His sweaty smell would be the over-riding smell on that blanket. I think the dogs (GNR weren't they?) followed his smell rather than Madeleines
No they weren't GNR dogs, they are a special canine squad that have helped many victims not only in Portugal but also in other countries (they have been in the 911, in the huge Greek earthquake, in Haiti,...just to mention a couple). If they had been given a piece of Madeleine's clothing they would follow her and not a sweaty pretense abductor.
Think that one through logically, Luz. If you are deploying dogs to find victims of natural disasters such as earth quakes, you want the type that will track the generic human scent, not the individual one.
The type of dog you describe would be air-scenting. That's the generic scent.
This is right.Well I have a different take on this.
Budlemans lifter must have handled Madeleines blanket to move her and possibly to wipe his sweaty hands. His sweaty smell would be the over-riding smell on that blanket. I think the dogs (GNR weren't they?) followed his smell rather than Madeleines
No they weren't GNR dogs, they are a special canine squad that have helped many victims not only in Portugal but also in other countries (they have been in the 911, in the huge Greek earthquake, in Haiti,...just to mention a couple). If they had been given a piece of Madeleine's clothing they would follow her and not a sweaty pretense abductor.
Think that one through logically, Luz. If you are deploying dogs to find victims of natural disasters such as earth quakes, you want the type that will track the generic human scent, not the individual one.
The type of dog you describe would be air-scenting. That's the generic scent.
This is right.Well I have a different take on this.
Budlemans lifter must have handled Madeleines blanket to move her and possibly to wipe his sweaty hands. His sweaty smell would be the over-riding smell on that blanket. I think the dogs (GNR weren't they?) followed his smell rather than Madeleines
No they weren't GNR dogs, they are a special canine squad that have helped many victims not only in Portugal but also in other countries (they have been in the 911, in the huge Greek earthquake, in Haiti,...just to mention a couple). If they had been given a piece of Madeleine's clothing they would follow her and not a sweaty pretense abductor.
Think that one through logically, Luz. If you are deploying dogs to find victims of natural disasters such as earth quakes, you want the type that will track the generic human scent, not the individual one.
The type of dog you describe would be air-scenting. That's the generic scent.
Many search and rescue dogs were used in PDL and around. Some came from the GNR national school, but this school sent also two experimented sniffers dogs. They were given Madeleine bath towel. Curiously their route, on the 4th of May night, was similar to the route of the patrol dog (given Madeleine's comfort blanket) about 4 hours after the disappearance. This patrol dog, though, had some training in tracking.
Could I ask something which hasn't been mentioned yet. There are two maps currently being shown on other sites which show tracker dog trails to Supermercado Baptista in Praia da Luz. I have attached them for reference below.Rub... as some would say. It seems tabloids invented them. There's a correct map in the PJ Files.
Where did these come from because I fail to see any statements to back them up?
Could I ask something which hasn't been mentioned yet. There are two maps currently being shown on other sites which show tracker dog trails to Supermercado Baptista in Praia da Luz. I have attached them for reference below.
Where did these come from because I fail to see any statements to back them up?
I have had a look and they are both described as >> GNR Portuguese Tracker Dogs trail of the Live Madeline From apartment to Baptista supermarket car park.
Is it to be assumed that those trails were laid down when the McCann's popped down to the supermercado?
Could the other trail which terminates opposite reception be just as innocent?
Could I ask something which hasn't been mentioned yet. There are two maps currently being shown on other sites which show tracker dog trails to Supermercado Baptista in Praia da Luz. I have attached them for reference below.
Where did these come from because I fail to see any statements to back them up?
Yes, Redblossom. You'll see my point later. Let's call that car park a public car park (which it is) and let's regret the tapas gate was closed, since one dog, Rex, tried to get through in vain. The track stopped at the lamp post.
Was this the last route of Madeleine ? Did she meet her fate at the lamppost ?
?Yes, Redblossom. You'll see my point later. Let's call that car park a public car park (which it is) and let's regret the tapas gate was closed, since one dog, Rex, tried to get through in vain. The track stopped at the lamp post.
Was this the last route of Madeleine ? Did she meet her fate at the lamppost ?
more fascination
Yes, Redblossom. You'll see my point later. Let's call that car park a public car park (which it is) and let's regret the tapas gate was closed, since one dog, Rex, tried to get through in vain. The track stopped at the lamp post.
Was this the last route of Madeleine ? Did she meet her fate at the lamppost ?
Meditate about it !Yes, Redblossom. You'll see my point later. Let's call that car park a public car park (which it is) and let's regret the tapas gate was closed, since one dog, Rex, tried to get through in vain. The track stopped at the lamp post.
Was this the last route of Madeleine ? Did she meet her fate at the lamppost ?
I agree the tracker dogs followed Madeleines last recent steps even to the car park, its a jaunt across the tapas bar where she went every day for high tea, she could have run off to there and back, thats what kida do sometimes, I just wondered what the connection was to the cadaver dog
Meditate about it !Yes, Redblossom. You'll see my point later. Let's call that car park a public car park (which it is) and let's regret the tapas gate was closed, since one dog, Rex, tried to get through in vain. The track stopped at the lamp post.
Was this the last route of Madeleine ? Did she meet her fate at the lamppost ?
I agree the tracker dogs followed Madeleines last recent steps even to the car park, its a jaunt across the tapas bar where she went every day for high tea, she could have run off to there and back, thats what kida do sometimes, I just wondered what the connection was to the cadaver dog
We know, through her father, that Madeleine and the twins behind went this route (actually it's not so sure, but it's another problem) one morning, Tuesday, Wednesday, he didn't remember. Once, only once.
The lamp post was where the track ended. I can't explain that. One could speculate that Madeleine met someone near that lamp post. Who knows ?The trail followed was around the apartments and to the car park, to the tapas bar and back to the car park, NONE of this has anything to do with Tanner or the Smith sighting, it means, Madeleines trail was around all normal places she frequented or may have gone to
To see a link to the cadaver dog, one has to think ! I might be wrong !...
The lamp post was where the track ended. I can't explain that. One could speculate that Madeleine met someone near that lamp post. Who knows ?The trail followed was around the apartments and to the car park, to the tapas bar and back to the car park, NONE of this has anything to do with Tanner or the Smith sighting, it means, Madeleines trail was around all normal places she frequented or may have gone to
To see a link to the cadaver dog, one has to think ! I might be wrong !...
The cadaver dog alerted inside the apartment and just outside it,nothing in any streets it was deployed on in PDL or beaches or derelict vuildings or scrubland etc it searched, I dont see any connection between cadaver dog and sniffer trailing dogs
The lamp post was where the track ended. I can't explain that. One could speculate that Madeleine met someone near that lamp post. Who knows ?The trail followed was around the apartments and to the car park, to the tapas bar and back to the car park, NONE of this has anything to do with Tanner or the Smith sighting, it means, Madeleines trail was around all normal places she frequented or may have gone to
To see a link to the cadaver dog, one has to think ! I might be wrong !...
The cadaver dog alerted inside the apartment and just outside it,nothing in any streets it was deployed on in PDL or beaches or derelict vuildings or scrubland etc it searched, I dont see any connection between cadaver dog and sniffer trailing dogs
you said
"I agree the tracker dogs followed Madeleines last recent steps even to the car park, its a jaunt across the tapas bar where she went every day for high tea, she could have run off to there and back, thats what kida do sometimes, I just wondered what the connection was to the cadaver dog"
it is you that linked the cadaver dogs
It wasn't Redblossom who linked the cadaver dogs to the tracker ones. It was me. i just attempted. If nobody's interested in this, I don't want to pursue.
Could I suggest something here peeps. Could it be that Maddie walked or ran down to that lamp post across from reception and was then picked up by an adult. Wasn't she in the habit of running ahead according to the McCanns?
This is the only possible which fits the facts.
Are you happy posting such rubbish without any facts what so ever?
Could I suggest something here peeps. Could it be that Maddie walked or ran down to that lamp post across from reception and was then picked up by an adult. Wasn't she in the habit of running ahead according to the McCanns?
This is the only possible which fits the facts.
I give up. Seriously.Could I suggest something here peeps. Could it be that Maddie walked or ran down to that lamp post across from reception and was then picked up by an adult. Wasn't she in the habit of running ahead according to the McCanns?
This is the only possible which fits the facts.
perfectly reasonable
Could I suggest something here peeps. Could it be that Maddie walked or ran down to that lamp post across from reception and was then picked up by an adult. Wasn't she in the habit of running ahead according to the McCanns?
This is the only possible which fits the facts.
If you read her parents' statements, Icabodcrane, you'll see that, on the 3rd of May, Madeleine probably went out and in four times through the patio doors. The first dog (Numi) was taken inside (4th of May, around 2am) and went close to the patio door that, unfortunately no one opened for him.Could I suggest something here peeps. Could it be that Maddie walked or ran down to that lamp post across from reception and was then picked up by an adult. Wasn't she in the habit of running ahead according to the McCanns?
This is the only possible which fits the facts.
That is certainly possible
Could I ask something that has probably been asked before ... is it possible the dogs tracked an earlier scent ( one that had been left sometime during that day ?
From memory, on Tuesday, 1 May 2007, being shown by RUSSELL, he went to pick up MADELEINE at creche using a short-cut that began at the car park opposite the secondary reception and went between the buildings, which he used to fetch and carry his daughter.Could I suggest something here peeps. Could it be that Maddie walked or ran down to that lamp post across from reception and was then picked up by an adult. Wasn't she in the habit of running ahead according to the McCanns?
This is the only possible which fits the facts.
That is certainly possible
Could I ask something that has probably been asked before ... is it possible the dogs tracked an earlier scent ( one that had been left sometime during that day ?
The secondary reception, in front of the public car park, gives access to the pool and the Tapas bar.
The short cut starts in the public car park and leads to the primary reception, about 350 m away, down town (Madeleine's creche was there).
The tracker dogs picked up the scent on Francisco Gentil Martins likely where Madeleine, on the 3rd, had passed 4 times. But they stopped at the lamp post which is more or less the start of the short cut. However one of the dogs, Rex, likely picked up the last of the 4 times : after losing the trail near the lamp post he crossed again FGM, this time towards the secondary reception (Madeleine must have done that when she came back from the creche to have her high tea near the pook). Unfortunately the door was closed and nobody was asked to open it. We could have followed her trail ! A pity !The secondary reception, in front of the public car park, gives access to the pool and the Tapas bar.
The short cut starts in the public car park and leads to the primary reception, about 350 m away, down town (Madeleine's creche was there).
Thank you Anne. So it is possible that the tracker dogs picked up Madeleine's scent from her normal daily movements in that area. That is what I was trying to understand.
Well found Redblossom and AnneIcabodcrane, the tracker dogs' behaviour is imo crucial, supposing you operate a reductio ad absurdum..
thank you Icab, cant spell the rest until I look at it intentlyHow do you explain this ?
@)(++(*
and Anne
It seems no trail of an abducted Madeleine was found then? In the context of the Jane Tanner or the Smith direction.
thank you Icab, cant spell the rest until I look at it intentlyHow do you explain this ?
@)(++(*
and Anne
It seems no trail of an abducted Madeleine was found then? In the context of the Jane Tanner or the Smith direction.
Possibly. But what about the laws of probability ?thank you Icab, cant spell the rest until I look at it intentlyHow do you explain this ?
@)(++(*
and Anne
It seems no trail of an abducted Madeleine was found then? In the context of the Jane Tanner or the Smith direction.
means to me, if the dogs are correct, neither sighting was of Madeleine
Possibly. But what about the laws of probability ?thank you Icab, cant spell the rest until I look at it intentlyHow do you explain this ?
@)(++(*
and Anne
It seems no trail of an abducted Madeleine was found then? In the context of the Jane Tanner or the Smith direction.
means to me, if the dogs are correct, neither sighting was of Madeleine
Not asking, just wondering whether probability laws "allow" two carriers (if none of them was carrying Madeleine, then there's no doubt they're different persons) neglecting to step forward saying "I was on that street at that time bringing my daughter back home".Possibly. But what about the laws of probability ?thank you Icab, cant spell the rest until I look at it intentlyHow do you explain this ?
@)(++(*
and Anne
It seems no trail of an abducted Madeleine was found then? In the context of the Jane Tanner or the Smith direction.
means to me, if the dogs are correct, neither sighting was of Madeleine
I dont know what you are asking Anne
Not asking, just wondering whether probability laws "allow" two carriers (if none of them was carrying Madeleine, then there's no doubt they're different persons) neglecting to step forward saying "I was on that street at that time bringing my daughter back home".Possibly. But what about the laws of probability ?thank you Icab, cant spell the rest until I look at it intentlyHow do you explain this ?
@)(++(*
and Anne
It seems no trail of an abducted Madeleine was found then? In the context of the Jane Tanner or the Smith direction.
means to me, if the dogs are correct, neither sighting was of Madeleine
I dont know what you are asking Anne
May be they were both deaf. Or one was deaf and the other pretended his lover or his wife that he was in Abu Dhabi with his daughter or the deaf one was not deaf at all but an Ossetian speaking only Digor.Not asking, just wondering whether probability laws "allow" two carriers (if none of them was carrying Madeleine, then there's no doubt they're different persons) neglecting to step forward saying "I was on that street at that time bringing my daughter back home".Possibly. But what about the laws of probability ?thank you Icab, cant spell the rest until I look at it intentlyHow do you explain this ?
@)(++(*
and Anne
It seems no trail of an abducted Madeleine was found then? In the context of the Jane Tanner or the Smith direction.
means to me, if the dogs are correct, neither sighting was of Madeleine
I dont know what you are asking Anne
Who knows, maybe they didnt want to be involved, it happens, maybe one or both are the type that dont watch tv much, not as if these sightings were on tv 24/7/365
Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.There's no evidence of this.
Jane Tanner's sighting is pure fabrication to provide Gerry McCann with an alibi for the Smith sighting, an event that McCann would have prefered not to have been known... yes that's correct, a truly independant sighting of their daughter's claimed abduction that for some reason has never been part of one of their staged briefings for the press.Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.There's no evidence of this.
Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.There's no evidence of this.
Jes Wilkins states that she didn't pass by during his meeting with Gerry. Russell O'Brien, Jane Tanner's partner and the writer of the first two timelines fails to highlight the claimed second visit of Tanner to their apartment.Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.There's no evidence of this.
You're right, Anne, there isn't. Even the Mcannpjfiles (when it was known as just mccannfiles) at one time had a separate section stressing that the canard that JT never left the table all evening is an inference based on absence of information rather than information.
That is to say that no one in the files remarked on Jane's whereabouts at any given time.
There's no earthly reason why anyone should.
Jane Tanner's sighting is pure fabrication to provide Gerry McCann with an alibi for the Smith sighting, an event that McCann would have prefered not to have been known... yes that's correct, a truly independant sighting of their daughter's claimed abduction that for some reason has never been part of one of their staged briefings for the press.Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.There's no evidence of this.
Jes Wilkins states that he didn't pass by during his meeting with Gerry. Russell O'Brien, Jane Tanner's partner and the writer of the first two timelines fails to highlight the claimed second visit of Tanner to their apartment.Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.There's no evidence of this.
You're right, Anne, there isn't. Even the Mcannpjfiles (when it was known as just mccannfiles) at one time had a separate section stressing that the canard that JT never left the table all evening is an inference based on absence of information rather than information.
That is to say that no one in the files remarked on Jane's whereabouts at any given time.
There's no earthly reason why anyone should.
hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it.Lace, sniffer dogs are repelled by cadaver scent.
Oh, so he did see her but just forgot.Jes Wilkins states that he didn't pass by during his meeting with Gerry. Russell O'Brien, Jane Tanner's partner and the writer of the first two timelines fails to highlight the claimed second visit of Tanner to their apartment.Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.There's no evidence of this.
You're right, Anne, there isn't. Even the Mcannpjfiles (when it was known as just mccannfiles) at one time had a separate section stressing that the canard that JT never left the table all evening is an inference based on absence of information rather than information.
That is to say that no one in the files remarked on Jane's whereabouts at any given time.
There's no earthly reason why anyone should.
No he doesn't. He says that he doesn't remember seeing her, which is quite different:
The conversation lasted for approximately three to five minutes. We spoke of the care of children and how they were getting along. He told me something like 'he was on night duty'. I explained to him that I was returning to the apartment as my son was now sleeping. I assumed that Gerry was off to dine with the group in the Tapas bar, but I cannot precisely say this came from him or if I figured this out from our previous conversations regarding the checking system for the children. I remember that Gerry told me if he had stayed another week, he would likely do as I was doing and would stay with the children one night. It appeared as though he was jealous of what I was doing, but given that he was with a big group, he felt the obligation to meet with them every night, and the chosen location was the Tapas bar. I believe that there was some sort of agreement with the tapas Bar as they appeared to have a reservation every night and it was impossible for other guests to book at spot there.
I do not know if we were face to face or side to side when this conversation occurred. As I had the pram with me I was rocking it so my son could sleep, it seems to me that I was in the downward direction, but it is possible that I was in the opposite direction.
I do not remember having seen anyone else at this time besides Gerry. After leaving each other, Gerry walked downward in the direction of the Tapas Bar and I began to walk in the other direction, up the pathway. I turned left at the crossing and passed the apartment. I did not meet anyone else during my walk and once in my apartment, I did not venture out again.
Q. Relative to whether I know Jane Tanner;
Now I know her name, description of the clothes and photos which I have seen in the press. At that time I knew of her as a member of the group but did not know her name. I do not remember having seen her when I spoke with Gerry,
Just the one carrier as seen by the Smith family. Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html#tap19Just the one carrier as seen by the Smith family. Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.
Another outright LIE! ?8)@)-)
Jane Tanner, was not in the Tapas bar, when Kate raised the alarm. She stayed in her apartment for her husband to go back, for his meal. She did not return to the bar.
"After having quickly eaten the main course she went to the apartment to take the place of her husband so that he could finish his meal. Her husband returned to the restaurant. Some time later, she doesn't know precisely how long, she looked through the lounge window towards the restaurant area, ascertaining, strangely, that there was no-one seated at the table it being that it was still very early for all of them to have already finished the meal. Later she heard voices of KH and FP who were in the corridor in front of the bedroom windows and who called, desperately, for Madeleine. When she saw her it was KH herself who told the deponent that Madeleine had disappeared, not clarifying in what circumstances, continuing her search. The deponent stayed in her apartment because her daughter, El, was asleep and the smallest, Ev, was still awake and complaining".
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html#tap19Just the one carrier as seen by the Smith family. Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.
Another outright LIE! ?8)@)-)
Jane Tanner, was not in the Tapas bar, when Kate raised the alarm. She stayed in her apartment for her husband to go back, for his meal. She did not return to the bar.
"After having quickly eaten the main course she went to the apartment to take the place of her husband so that he could finish his meal. Her husband returned to the restaurant. Some time later, she doesn't know precisely how long, she looked through the lounge window towards the restaurant area, ascertaining, strangely, that there was no-one seated at the table it being that it was still very early for all of them to have already finished the meal. Later she heard voices of KH and FP who were in the corridor in front of the bedroom windows and who called, desperately, for Madeleine. When she saw her it was KH herself who told the deponent that Madeleine had disappeared, not clarifying in what circumstances, continuing her search. The deponent stayed in her apartment because her daughter, El, was asleep and the smallest, Ev, was still awake and complaining".
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html#tap19http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html#tap19Just the one carrier as seen by the Smith family. Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.
Another outright LIE! ?8)@)-)
Jane Tanner, was not in the Tapas bar, when Kate raised the alarm. She stayed in her apartment for her husband to go back, for his meal. She did not return to the bar.
"After having quickly eaten the main course she went to the apartment to take the place of her husband so that he could finish his meal. Her husband returned to the restaurant. Some time later, she doesn't know precisely how long, she looked through the lounge window towards the restaurant area, ascertaining, strangely, that there was no-one seated at the table it being that it was still very early for all of them to have already finished the meal. Later she heard voices of KH and FP who were in the corridor in front of the bedroom windows and who called, desperately, for Madeleine. When she saw her it was KH herself who told the deponent that Madeleine had disappeared, not clarifying in what circumstances, continuing her search. The deponent stayed in her apartment because her daughter, El, was asleep and the smallest, Ev, was still awake and complaining".
She remembers that at about 21h10 Gerald left the restaurant (3) to go to the apartment to check on the children. Five minutes later, the witness left, to go to her apartment to see whether her daughters were OK. At this moment she saw Gerry talking to an Englishman called Jez whom they had got to know during the holidays. They played tennis with him.
She passed by them knowing that Gerry had already been in the apartment (1) to check his children.
Meanwhile a man appeared ( * ) carrying a child (**), with a hurried walk, it being this detail together with the fact that the child dressed in pyjamas, without being wrapped up in a blanket, that caught her attention. She only managed to see him from the side, with the child in his arms. She noticed the individual's presence exactly when she had just passed by Gerry and Jez who were talking, having seen this person step off the pavement that borders on the apartment block where they were staying and rapidly cross the road.
The entrance to the apartment building (1) is exactly at the place (street) where the individual appeared from.
After checking on her daughters, she returned to the restaurant. On her way back Gerry was no longer talking in the place where she had seen him.
When she arrived at the restaurant Gerry was already there, accompanied by his wife, Kate.
About 15 - 20 minutes later, her husband Russell and Matthew left to check on the children. As her daughter E**e was restless and crying, Russell stayed in the apartment.
Meanwhile Matthew went to check his child and those of Kate and Gerry. According to what he said, he saw the twins but he did not see Madeleine. As there was no noise he supposed that all was well and returned to the restaurant. Matthew informed the witness that Russell had stayed in the apartment.
After having quickly eaten her main course, the witness went to her apartment in order to take over from Russell, so that he could have his dinner.
When she was in the apartment, at about 22h00 - 22h15 she heard Kate and Fiona shouting and saying that Madeleine had disappeared.
When asked, she says that she thinks it was Kate who discovered the girl to be missing, the witness is not sure due not being in the restaurant at that time.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html#tap2
@Lace
How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it.
The sniffer dogs don't follow body's scent, they rather avoid it.
If......................., there was an easy place to hide Madeleine's body. I thought of it, no wonder that Gerald, eventually, did too.
@Lace
How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it.
The sniffer dogs don't follow body's scent, they rather avoid it.
If......................., there was an easy place to hide Madeleine's body. I thought of it, no wonder that Gerald, eventually, did too.
What does this mean "........."?? What easy place to hide the body? Please explain.
Hi Carana !@Lace
How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it.
The sniffer dogs don't follow body's scent, they rather avoid it.
If......................., there was an easy place to hide Madeleine's body. I thought of it, no wonder that Gerald, eventually, did too.
What does this mean "........."?? What easy place to hide the body? Please explain.
Ditto. Where would have been an easy place?
In reading the reports on the Portuguese sniffer dogs, I missed the report of the handler that was given a towel to sniff (sic):Who are you quoting ? Who is the handler who.. sniffed ?
He comes to the process in the role of Chief of the GNR Search and Rescue Team.
I think that confirms it. Search and rescue dogs don't track the individual and unique human scent.
In reading the reports on the Portuguese sniffer dogs, I missed the report of the handler that was given a towel to sniff (sic):Who are you quoting ? Who is the handler who.. sniffed ?
He comes to the process in the role of Chief of the GNR Search and Rescue Team.
I think that confirms it. Search and rescue dogs don't track the individual and unique human scent.
Both dogs which were given Madeleine's towel to sniff were sniffer dogs, not at all search and rescue ones (teams of that kind came also from Lisbon). They belong to the GNR national school and came from Lisbon on purpose on the 4th.
Hi Carana !@Lace
How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it.
The sniffer dogs don't follow body's scent, they rather avoid it.
If......................., there was an easy place to hide Madeleine's body. I thought of it, no wonder that Gerald, eventually, did too.
What does this mean "........."?? What easy place to hide the body? Please explain.
Ditto. Where would have been an easy place?
This is a purely hypothetical reaction to the "How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it?" from Lace.
Easy for a pragmatic person like GMC, supposing of course the motive is crucial.
I certainly wouldn't make mine the idea of a multiple body-moving operation.Hi Carana !@Lace
How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it.
The sniffer dogs don't follow body's scent, they rather avoid it.
If......................., there was an easy place to hide Madeleine's body. I thought of it, no wonder that Gerald, eventually, did too.
What does this mean "........."?? What easy place to hide the body? Please explain.
Ditto. Where would have been an easy place?
This is a purely hypothetical reaction to the "How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it?" from Lace.
Easy for a pragmatic person like GMC, supposing of course the motive is crucial.
You haven't said where, Anne. And at which stage of this hypothetical multiple body-moving phases are you thinking of?
Thanks, Ferryman, there's a misunderstanding. This coordinator of the search and rescue team isn't the handler of the two dogs. The handler is Pedro EstevesIn reading the reports on the Portuguese sniffer dogs, I missed the report of the handler that was given a towel to sniff (sic):Who are you quoting ? Who is the handler who.. sniffed ?
He comes to the process in the role of Chief of the GNR Search and Rescue Team.
I think that confirms it. Search and rescue dogs don't track the individual and unique human scent.
Both dogs which were given Madeleine's towel to sniff were sniffer dogs, not at all search and rescue ones (teams of that kind came also from Lisbon). They belong to the GNR national school and came from Lisbon on purpose on the 4th.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_SILVA.htm
I certainly wouldn't make mine the idea of a multiple body-moving operation.Hi Carana !@Lace
How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it.
The sniffer dogs don't follow body's scent, they rather avoid it.
If......................., there was an easy place to hide Madeleine's body. I thought of it, no wonder that Gerald, eventually, did too.
What does this mean "........."?? What easy place to hide the body? Please explain.
Ditto. Where would have been an easy place?
This is a purely hypothetical reaction to the "How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it?" from Lace.
Easy for a pragmatic person like GMC, supposing of course the motive is crucial.
You haven't said where, Anne. And at which stage of this hypothetical multiple body-moving phases are you thinking of?
Carana, I think the PJ/Amaral theory is erroneous ! They thought the "findings" in the Scenic was the missing link between the disappearance and the burial of Madeleine's body and built an scenario too complex (imo) to be probable. They were not the only ones to wonder what had happened to the body, if there was a body ! Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated. Even Pat Brown went from the States with the objective and the instruments to find a sanctuary !I certainly wouldn't make mine the idea of a multiple body-moving operation.Hi Carana !@Lace
How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it.
The sniffer dogs don't follow body's scent, they rather avoid it.
If......................., there was an easy place to hide Madeleine's body. I thought of it, no wonder that Gerald, eventually, did too.
What does this mean "........."?? What easy place to hide the body? Please explain.
Ditto. Where would have been an easy place?
This is a purely hypothetical reaction to the "How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it?" from Lace.
Easy for a pragmatic person like GMC, supposing of course the motive is crucial.
You haven't said where, Anne. And at which stage of this hypothetical multiple body-moving phases are you thinking of?
Not following. You're suggesting that (in a particular hypothetical situation) the body was only moved once?
If so, how would that coincide with Amaral's theory?
Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated.Have you read his 3 reports, his rog, and the document on the EVRD dog ?
But Mark Harrison just worked to the brief Encanrcadio (sp) gave him.
Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated.Have you read his 3 reports, his rog, and the document on the EVRD dog ?
But Mark Harrison just worked to the brief Encanrcadio (sp) gave him.
Then I don't understand your point. MH's help was requested according to his speciality.Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated.Have you read his 3 reports, his rog, and the document on the EVRD dog ?
But Mark Harrison just worked to the brief Encanrcadio (sp) gave him.
Yes, very carefully.
Then I don't understand your point. MH's help was requested according to his speciality.Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated.Have you read his 3 reports, his rog, and the document on the EVRD dog ?
But Mark Harrison just worked to the brief Encanrcadio (sp) gave him.
Yes, very carefully.
If you agree that the relevance of searching an alive Madeleine after 10 weeks had been debated between the LC and PJ inspectors and between the late G. Encarnação and the NPIA before requesting MH's help on searching a victim of murder (and, as you've read, MH excluded no one), then we could try and sing the same hymn !Then I don't understand your point. MH's help was requested according to his speciality.Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated.Have you read his 3 reports, his rog, and the document on the EVRD dog ?
But Mark Harrison just worked to the brief Encanrcadio (sp) gave him.
Yes, very carefully.
If you agree that Harrison just worked to the brief Encarnadio gave him, then we're singing from the same hymn-sheet.
Then I don't understand your point. MH's help was requested according to his speciality.Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated.Have you read his 3 reports, his rog, and the document on the EVRD dog ?
But Mark Harrison just worked to the brief Encanrcadio (sp) gave him.
Yes, very carefully.
Then I don't understand your point. MH's help was requested according to his speciality.Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated.Have you read his 3 reports, his rog, and the document on the EVRD dog ?
But Mark Harrison just worked to the brief Encanrcadio (sp) gave him.
Yes, very carefully.
Perhaps I've read the report a little more closely than you?
He says that his report considers, solely the possibility that Madeleine has been murdered (contradicting a claim of Amaral's that no one talked about murder) and offers to consider other possibilities or scenarios on request.
He also disowns UK participation in 3 searches and, after the inspections at the villa and the gym, issued PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct a search.
If he'd seen that as his duty, he'd have done so before the first search.
There is also strong reason to believe the PJ cribbed off this literature Harrison gave them for their report of the inspection at the gym.
And no one has provided a convincing explanation of why there were searches at places Madeleine never went near.
Then I don't understand your point. MH's help was requested according to his speciality.Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated.Have you read his 3 reports, his rog, and the document on the EVRD dog ?
But Mark Harrison just worked to the brief Encanrcadio (sp) gave him.
Yes, very carefully.
Perhaps I've read the report a little more closely than you?
He says that his report considers, solely the possibility that Madeleine has been murdered (contradicting a claim of Amaral's that no one talked about murder) and offers to consider other possibilities or scenarios on request.
He also disowns UK participation in 3 searches and, after the inspections at the villa and the gym, issued PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct a search.
If he'd seen that as his duty, he'd have done so before the first search.
There is also strong reason to believe the PJ cribbed off this literature Harrison gave them for their report of the inspection at the gym.
And no one has provided a convincing explanation of why there were searches at places Madeleine never went near.
Lee Rainbow mentioned murder when he advised that a possible homicide involving the parents should be investigated with the same vigour as a possible abduction
I believe Harrison was acting on that advice
Then I don't understand your point. MH's help was requested according to his speciality.Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated.Have you read his 3 reports, his rog, and the document on the EVRD dog ?
But Mark Harrison just worked to the brief Encanrcadio (sp) gave him.
Yes, very carefully.
Perhaps I've read the report a little more closely than you?
He says that his report considers, solely the possibility that Madeleine has been murdered (contradicting a claim of Amaral's that no one talked about murder) and offers to consider other possibilities or scenarios on request.
He also disowns UK participation in 3 searches and, after the inspections at the villa and the gym, issued PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct a search.
If he'd seen that as his duty, he'd have done so before the first search.
There is also strong reason to believe the PJ cribbed off this literature Harrison gave them for their report of the inspection at the gym.
And no one has provided a convincing explanation of why there were searches at places Madeleine never went near.
Then I don't understand your point. MH's help was requested according to his speciality.Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated.Have you read his 3 reports, his rog, and the document on the EVRD dog ?
But Mark Harrison just worked to the brief Encanrcadio (sp) gave him.
Yes, very carefully.
Perhaps I've read the report a little more closely than you?
He says that his report considers, solely the possibility that Madeleine has been murdered (contradicting a claim of Amaral's that no one talked about murder) and offers to consider other possibilities or scenarios on request.
He also disowns UK participation in 3 searches and, after the inspections at the villa and the gym, issued PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct a search.
If he'd seen that as his duty, he'd have done so before the first search.
There is also strong reason to believe the PJ cribbed off this literature Harrison gave them for their report of the inspection at the gym.
And no one has provided a convincing explanation of why there were searches at places Madeleine never went near.
Lee Rainbow mentioned murder when he advised that a possible homicide involving the parents should be investigated with the same vigour as a possible abduction
I believe Harrison was acting on that advice
Rainbow simply said that the possibility of parental involvement should not be discounted, but added that there was no evidence to suggest such.
He offered standard, generic, advice, routinely issued in circumstances such as those of that investigation ...
Ferryman, I'd appreciate really hearing your hymn ;), but please try to argue with quotations and references in order to help people follow you.Then I don't understand your point. MH's help was requested according to his speciality.Mark Harrison did a reconnaissance, debated with colleagues from the University of the Algarve, meditated.Have you read his 3 reports, his rog, and the document on the EVRD dog ?
But Mark Harrison just worked to the brief Encanrcadio (sp) gave him.
Yes, very carefully.
Perhaps I've read the report a little more closely than you?
He says that his report considers, solely the possibility that Madeleine has been murdered (contradicting a claim of Amaral's that no one talked about murder) and offers to consider other possibilities or scenarios on request.
He also disowns UK participation in 3 searches and, after the inspections at the villa and the gym, issued PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct a search.
If he'd seen that as his duty, he'd have done so before the first search.
There is also strong reason to believe the PJ cribbed off this literature Harrison gave them for their report of the inspection at the gym.
And no one has provided a convincing explanation of why there were searches at places Madeleine never went near.
Ferryman, I'm re-reading all MH's literature (I like that chap, I think he's a gentleman). Here above I underlined your points that need (imo) some clarification. Nearly all... I'm sorry.
Perhaps I've read the report a little more closely than you?
He says that his report considers, solely the possibility that Madeleine has been murdered (contradicting a claim of Amaral's that no one talked about murder) and offers to consider other possibilities or scenarios on request.
He also disowns UK participation in 3 searches and, after the inspections at the villa and the gym, issued PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct a search.
If he'd seen that as his duty, he'd have done so before the first search.
There is also strong reason to believe the PJ cribbed off this literature Harrison gave them for their report of the inspection at the gym.
And no one has provided a convincing explanation of why there were searches at places Madeleine never went near.
Ferryman, I'm re-reading all MH's literature (I like that chap, I think he's a gentleman). Here above I underlined your points that need (imo) some clarification. Nearly all... I'm sorry.
Perhaps I've read the report a little more closely than you?
He says that his report considers, solely the possibility that Madeleine has been murdered (contradicting a claim of Amaral's that no one talked about murder) and offers to consider other possibilities or scenarios on request.
He also disowns UK participation in 3 searches and, after the inspections at the villa and the gym, issued PJ personnel with translated instructions on how to conduct a search.
If he'd seen that as his duty, he'd have done so before the first search.
There is also strong reason to believe the PJ cribbed off this literature Harrison gave them for their report of the inspection at the gym.
And no one has provided a convincing explanation of why there were searches at places Madeleine never went near.
1) I admit you read MH more closely than me.
2) Where does GA contradicts MH on the topic of murder ?
3) I might be dumb, but where does MH say that he disowns 3 searches ?
4) Are those 3 disowned searches a) the villa, b) the clothes and c) the cars (the "disowned" reason here being that the Scenic wasn't supposed to be checked) ?
5) Do you infer from MH'd (late) instructions that for some reason he wasn't aware the PJ inspectors had no preparation to this kind of task whatsoever ? Do you think that he would have called Eddie and Keela if he'd been told there was a cadaver dog here in Portugal (btw there's one now).
6) you speak of "duty", I'm not sure this is right. MH doesn't seem to do things out of duty but when he thinks something is required and he can do it.
7) "strong reason to believe the PJ cribbed off this literature Harrison gave them". What is this "strong reason" ? And in what way was MH's literature "cribbed off" ?
On the relevance to search in places where Madeleine never went I agree with you. I'm not impressed neither by the clothes (possibly smelling UK corpses as someone suggested) nor by the car findings. The flat is another story.
In reading the reports on the Portuguese sniffer dogs, I missed the report of the handler whose dog was given a towel to sniff (sic):The dogs used to find Madeleine's scent trail were not sniffer/detection dogs, such as drugs or explosives dogs, they were SAR dogs, search and rescue, with scent discrimination. If they were not, no clothing or items with her scent on would have been requested.
He comes to the process in the role of Chief of the GNR Search and Rescue Team.
I think that confirms it. Search and rescue dogs don't track the individual and unique human scent.
2) I always had a feeling there was some fanfaronnade in GA's sayings, some kind of boasting that has to be related with Portuguese marialvism to be understood (I nevertheless think GA is deeply a honest guy). Let's say that the idea of murder came from the PJ, MH gently recognizing the PJ leadership in the investigation. Don't you think the PJ head inspector and the LC debated with the NPIA before deciding to send MH to PDL ?
First point to note is that Harrison's speciality is advising in murder investigations. So if you think of cause and effect, the PJ would not have drafted him in other than to advise on 'murder'.
The PJ had determined that Madeleine had been murdered and Harrison's role was to advise on how best to progress that line of enquiry.
3) ... where does MH say that he disowns 3 searches ?
Disowns in the sense that he does not own UK participation: for instance, describing searches at villa and gym as PJ exercises!
4) Are those 3 disowned searches a) the villa, b) the clothes and c) the cars (the "disowned" reason here being that the Scenic wasn't supposed to be checked) ?
Can't think of a single logical reason why the scenic should have been checked, even if that check did provide the one action of Grime's for which I give him credit: to have the ignition card tested independently. Otherwise, there would be stronger reason to suspect 'death scent in the car'
5) Do you infer from MH'd (late) instructions that for some reason he wasn't aware the PJ inspectors had no preparation to this kind of task whatsoever ? Do you think that he would have called Eddie and Keela if he'd been told there was a cadaver dog here in Portugal (btw there's one now).
No. I infer from the instructions that he had observed unacceptable practice in what he had observed.
7) "strong reason to believe the PJ cribbed off this literature Harrison gave them". What is this "strong reason" ? And in what way was MH's literature "cribbed off" ?
While the Portuguese clearly have experience (and expertise) in use of sniffer dogs, they don't, in use of cadaver dogs, and the principle of cross-contamination of a death scent is very specific to cadaver dogs. That has to have come from somewhere, and it clearly didn't come from Grime. So my money is on the instructions Harrison gave them.
And finally, there is a (moderately) thought-provoking blog advancing the theory that in his assertion that Gerry hid (distinct from buried) Madeleine on the beach, he actually plaguarised the proper detective work of Harrison.
Would you like to read it?
The dogs used to find Madeleine's scent trail were not sniffer/detection dogs, such as drugs or explosives dogs, they were SAR dogs, search and rescue, with scent discrimination. If they were not, no clothing or items with her scent on would have been requested.
A search and rescue dog trained to find an individual and unique scent would be able to find, only, the individual and unique scent of the person it was primed to find, not much use to all the other poor souls trapped and in need of rescue ...
No, Redblossom, the two dogs which were given the towel are pure sniffer dogs (in Portuguese pisteiros, tracker dogs).In reading the reports on the Portuguese sniffer dogs, I missed the report of the handler whose dog was given a towel to sniff (sic):The dogs used to find Madeleine's scent trail were not sniffer/detection dogs, such as drugs or explosives dogs, they were SAR dogs, search and rescue, with scent discrimination. If they were not, no clothing or items with her scent on would have been requested.
He comes to the process in the role of Chief of the GNR Search and Rescue Team.
I think that confirms it. Search and rescue dogs don't track the individual and unique human scent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detection_dog
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_dog
The dogs used to find Madeleine's scent trail were not sniffer/detection dogs, such as drugs or explosives dogs, they were SAR dogs, search and rescue, with scent discrimination. If they were not, no clothing or items with her scent on would have been requested.
A search and rescue dog trained to find an individual and unique scent would be able to find, only, the individual and unique scent of the person it was primed to find, not much use to all the other poor souls trapped and in need of rescue ...
That is why there are different types
From their training and experience, search and rescue dogs can be classified broadly as either airscenting dogs or trailing (and tracking) dogs. They also can be classified according to whether they scent discriminate, and under what conditions they can work. Scent discriminating dogs have proven their ability to alert only on the scent of an individual person, after being given a sample of that person's scent. Non-scent discriminating dogs alert on or follow any scent of a given type, such as any human scent or any cadaver scent. SAR dogs can be trained specifically for rubble searches, for water searches, and for avalanche searches.
The dogs used to find Madeleine's scent trail were not sniffer/detection dogs, such as drugs or explosives dogs, they were SAR dogs, search and rescue, with scent discrimination. If they were not, no clothing or items with her scent on would have been requested.Exactly.
A search and rescue dog trained to find an individual and unique scent would be able to find, only, the individual and unique scent of the person it was primed to find, not much use to all the other poor souls trapped and in need of rescue ...
Ferryman and Anne I will leave you to argue about the distinctions and titles for the various dogs used and if they are tracking or trailing dogs. If the dogs that were used when the Mccanns were asked to provide a scented article were not scent discriminating to a person, there would have been no point them asking for it!
SAR dogs look for humans
There are SAR dogs that look for ANY human
There are SAR dogs that look for ONE human
Ferryman and Anne I will leave you to argue about the distinctions and titles for the various dogs used and if they are tracking or trailing dogs. If the dogs that were used when the Mccanns were asked to provide a scented article were not scent discriminating to a person, there would have been no point them asking for it!Imo the trouble comes from having many words for designing the same reality. It's not a question of arguing but of using words clearly defined !
SAR dogs look for humans
There are SAR dogs that look for ANY human
There are SAR dogs that look for ONE human
Ferryman and Anne I will leave you to argue about the distinctions and titles for the various dogs used and if they are tracking or trailing dogs. If the dogs that were used when the Mccanns were asked to provide a scented article were not scent discriminating to a person, there would have been no point them asking for it!
SAR dogs look for humans
There are SAR dogs that look for ANY human
There are SAR dogs that look for ONE human
Witness Statement of Antonio Freitas Silva
Date: 2007.05.09
Location: DIC Portimao
Occupation: 1st Sergeant GNR
Location: GNR-Queluz
The deponent states that:
- He comes to the process in the role of Chief of the GNR Search and Rescue Team.
Search and rescue dogs track the generic human scent ...
ive explained to you sar dogs are generic or specific, that is a fact you just cannot spin in anyway shape or form
Tracker dogs may be used to find criminals or suspects.Ferryman and Anne I will leave you to argue about the distinctions and titles for the various dogs used and if they are tracking or trailing dogs. If the dogs that were used when the Mccanns were asked to provide a scented article were not scent discriminating to a person, there would have been no point them asking for it!
SAR dogs look for humans
There are SAR dogs that look for ANY human
There are SAR dogs that look for ONE human
Witness Statement of Antonio Freitas Silva
Date: 2007.05.09
Location: DIC Portimao
Occupation: 1st Sergeant GNR
Location: GNR-Queluz
The deponent states that:
- He comes to the process in the role of Chief of the GNR Search and Rescue Team.
Search and rescue dogs track the generic human scent ...
ive explained to you sar dogs are generic or specific, that is a fact you just cannot spin in anyway shape or form
Tracker dogs may be used to find criminals or suspects.
In the Madeleine McCann case, they were first used to find her trail, supposing she wandered off or had been carried away by someone, since JT spoke of her sighting rather soon.
I would say, one waiting...like if they knew what they were after
Tracker dogs may be used to find criminals or suspects.Ferryman and Anne I will leave you to argue about the distinctions and titles for the various dogs used and if they are tracking or trailing dogs. If the dogs that were used when the Mccanns were asked to provide a scented article were not scent discriminating to a person, there would have been no point them asking for it!
SAR dogs look for humans
There are SAR dogs that look for ANY human
There are SAR dogs that look for ONE human
Witness Statement of Antonio Freitas Silva
Date: 2007.05.09
Location: DIC Portimao
Occupation: 1st Sergeant GNR
Location: GNR-Queluz
The deponent states that:
- He comes to the process in the role of Chief of the GNR Search and Rescue Team.
Search and rescue dogs track the generic human scent ...
ive explained to you sar dogs are generic or specific, that is a fact you just cannot spin in anyway shape or form
In the Madeleine McCann case, they were first used to find her trail, supposing she wandered off or had been carried away by someone, since JT spoke of her sighting rather soon.
Tracker dogs may be used to find criminals or suspects.Ferryman and Anne I will leave you to argue about the distinctions and titles for the various dogs used and if they are tracking or trailing dogs. If the dogs that were used when the Mccanns were asked to provide a scented article were not scent discriminating to a person, there would have been no point them asking for it!
SAR dogs look for humans
There are SAR dogs that look for ANY human
There are SAR dogs that look for ONE human
Witness Statement of Antonio Freitas Silva
Date: 2007.05.09
Location: DIC Portimao
Occupation: 1st Sergeant GNR
Location: GNR-Queluz
The deponent states that:
- He comes to the process in the role of Chief of the GNR Search and Rescue Team.
Search and rescue dogs track the generic human scent ...
ive explained to you sar dogs are generic or specific, that is a fact you just cannot spin in anyway shape or form
In the Madeleine McCann case, they were first used to find her trail, supposing she wandered off or had been carried away by someone, since JT spoke of her sighting rather soon.
That is what ive been saying all night, it doesnt matter what you call them, they WERE the type of dogs to track individuals scents, SAR search and rescue is to rescue humans, any human or a single human specifically, goodnight Anne
Yes dear muratfan, the trail was like this, maddie went out of her flat turned left and ran around the back of the flats and back up the alley and down to the tapas bar entrace, where the twins were dropped off and then ran over to the car park which was the shortcut entrance to her own creche, which her dad took her to every day, these movements are confirmed by gerry mccann
The trail was never about her being carried by tanner man or smithman
Which suggests Maddie left 5a concealed somehow so as to not shed skin cells, perspiration and other things scent dogs follow
Yes dear muratfan, the trail was like this, maddie went out of her flat turned left and ran around the back of the flats and back up the alley and down to the tapas bar entrace, where the twins were dropped off and then ran over to the car park which was the shortcut entrance to her own creche, which her dad took her to every day, these movements are confirmed by gerry mccann
The trail was never about her being carried by tanner man or smithman
Which suggests Maddie left 5a concealed somehow so as to not shed skin cells, perspiration and other things scent dogs follow
Disprove any of it then
Nice set of assumptions there.
Yes dear muratfan, the trail was like this, maddie went out of her flat turned left and ran around the back of the flats and back up the alley and down to the tapas bar entrace, where the twins were dropped off and then ran over to the car park which was the shortcut entrance to her own creche, which her dad took her to every day, these movements are confirmed by gerry mccann
The trail was never about her being carried by tanner man or smithman
Which suggests Maddie left 5a concealed somehow so as to not shed skin cells, perspiration and other things scent dogs follow
Disprove any of it then
Nice set of assumptions there.
Yes dear muratfan, the trail was like this, maddie went out of her flat turned left and ran around the back of the flats and back up the alley and down to the tapas bar entrace, where the twins were dropped off and then ran over to the car park which was the shortcut entrance to her own creche, which her dad took her to every day, these movements are confirmed by gerry mccannOr perhaps her scent would have been concealed ?
The trail was never about her being carried by tanner man or smithman
Which suggests Maddie left 5a concealed somehow so as to not shed skin cells, perspiration and other things scent dogs follow
The abductor was an astute guy. He walked... Who is going to think for a second that a man carrying a child and walking is an abductor ?
A holiday resort, where children, especially young children get tired...yes a father would carry them back.Yes dear muratfan, the trail was like this, maddie went out of her flat turned left and ran around the back of the flats and back up the alley and down to the tapas bar entrace, where the twins were dropped off and then ran over to the car park which was the shortcut entrance to her own creche, which her dad took her to every day, these movements are confirmed by gerry mccannOr perhaps her scent would have been concealed ?
The trail was never about her being carried by tanner man or smithman
Which suggests Maddie left 5a concealed somehow so as to not shed skin cells, perspiration and other things scent dogs follow
The abductor was an astute guy. He walked... Who is going to think for a second that a man carrying a child and walking is an abductor ?
Yes dear muratfan, the trail was like this, maddie went out of her flat turned left and ran around the back of the flats and back up the alley and down to the tapas bar entrace, where the twins were dropped off and then ran over to the car park which was the shortcut entrance to her own creche, which her dad took her to every day, these movements are confirmed by gerry mccann
The trail was never about her being carried by tanner man or smithman
Which suggests Maddie left 5a concealed somehow so as to not shed skin cells, perspiration and other things scent dogs follow
Disprove any of it then
Nice set of assumptions there.
I have no remit to disprove any bullshit in the world.
In order to maintain face you need to make it clear when you are talking FACT and when you are talking FANTASY.
The dogs used to find Madeleine's scent trail were not sniffer/detection dogs, such as drugs or explosives dogs, they were SAR dogs, search and rescue, with scent discrimination. If they were not, no clothing or items with her scent on would have been requested.
A search and rescue dog trained to find an individual and unique scent would be able to find, only, the individual and unique scent of the person it was primed to find, not much use to all the other poor souls trapped and in need of rescue ...
So the tracker dogs could distinguish Madeleine's scent and track her route.
They could yes. Problem being she walked around the block every day so old scent can be confused with new scent.Would they have walked between block 5 and Block 4?
They could yes. Problem being she walked around the block every day so old scent can be confused with new scent.8((()*/
8((()*/
Also, airborne scent only of a little girl on a gusty night ? Unlikely IMO John ... but I am no expert.
They could yes. Problem being she walked around the block every day so old scent can be confused with new scent.
The air scenting seems to have been introduced to the forum 3 years ago by Ferryman in this thread. I don't seem to have found any cites for how SAR dogs work and if they cannot follow trails.
Is it your opinion then that the Portuguese really hadn't a clue about the capabilities of their working dogs? Do you therefore suppose it was a waste of time deploying them?
No, I think they knew there capabilities as tracking dogs and used them appropriately.
No, I think they knew there capabilities as tracking dogs and used them appropriately.
There are two kinds of search and rescue dogs, I think. Air scenting dogs find human beings in disasters and wildernesses. Tracker dogs follow the track of a specific human being after being given an example of the scent they need to find.
http://www.ussartf.org/dogs_search_rescue.htm
The two dogs used were tracker dogs; nose to the ground types.
There are two kinds of search and rescue dogs, I think. Air scenting dogs find human beings in disasters and wildernesses. Tracker dogs follow the track of a specific human being after being given an example of the scent they need to find.
http://www.ussartf.org/dogs_search_rescue.htm
The two dogs used were tracker dogs; nose to the ground types.
There are two kinds of search and rescue dogs, I think. Air scenting dogs find human beings in disasters and wildernesses. Tracker dogs follow the track of a specific human being after being given an example of the scent they need to find.
http://www.ussartf.org/dogs_search_rescue.htm
The two dogs used were tracker dogs; nose to the ground types.
There is one type of search-and-rescue dog, the air-scenting type that track the generic human scent.
Mark Harrison said that the Portuguese supported their search for Madeleine with air-scenting dogs because that's what the Portuguese did.
Both types were used. The air scenting dogs were used to search the surrounding area, the beach, etc. They were not given anything to sniff. Rex and Zarus, the tracker dogs, were given an article to sniff and set to work at the apartment.
At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team)....After the officers had been updated about facts relating to the disappearance, they tried to reconstruct the route the girl might have taken with the two tracker dogs. For this purpose the dogs were given a blanket to sniff, provided by the parents, which had been used by Madeleine.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
The Portuguese don't have ground-scenting dogs (of the type that track the unique human scent).
We've been through all this.
Present your evidence supporting your assertion then.
The Portuguese don't have ground-scenting dogs (of the type that track the unique human scent).
We've been through all this.
I have done so countless times. They debated about whether it was worth presenting the dog with something of Madeleine's to sniff, a clearly redundant conversation if these were ground-scenting dogs (ground-scenting dogs can't work any other way).
And Mark Harrison said the searches were supported with air-scenting dogs because that's what happened.
deleted
Dogs pressed for service into tracking duties, even though not trained in that discipline.
Read the bit about the debate whether it was worth giving them anything (of Madeleine's to sniff) even though dedicated tracker dogs can't work any other way.
There's your proof.
The GNR did not have dedicated tracker dogs.
But they experimented.
No criticism of them for that.
But they were equipped with dogs of the wrong discipline for the type of search required.
My cites contradict your unsupported assertions. You appear to be mistaken ferryman.
Thank you for being polite.
If, also, wrong!
I imagine in the first instance they just bring in any dog they have got in the area. I don't blame them for that initial issue.
Have you watched The Green Mile? if not then don't. It won't help.The air scenting dogs might have helped if Madeleine had gone into open country (seriously wandered off) or if the abductor was carrying her across country.
The initial dogs seemed to have some ground tracking ability as well for both of the teams tracked a similar path (as far as I understand it as per that photo with the dotted lines).
I don't think that photograph is an accurate representation of the path taken by the dogs, Robittybob1. There is a thread somewhere on the forum where we thrashed it out and actually reached agreement ... can't remember which one.
Maybe someone else can help?
I can't help with the thread, perhaps it was before my time? I think the photograph is accurate, it was part of the report submitted after the dogs followed the route on 8th May [the second time they did it, the first time being on 4th May]. The various descriptions of the route match the photo pretty much;
when outside, the dog turned toward [directed itself to] Block 4. However, at the corner of Block 5, it turned left heading for the path between the building and the leisure area - pools and restaurant - going on to turn left [again], i.e. going around the building, setting out for the main street, crossing the road to the wall of Block 6. There, it sniffed the bottom, turned to the right - going down the road - taking itself to the car park next to Block 6 where its search [took it] to a lamppost where it then became confused and stopped the search
Further, in an informal conversation with the GNR team, they advised that on the 4 May they had done the same work, with no control over the direction taken by the dogs, i.e. they were not directed into the buildings, it being certain that they took the same route described above, with the same attitude, losing the trail next to the car park of Block 6.
It is also certain that the course that they made to the car park next to Block 6 was done without hesitation and in a most convincing manner.
- To better understand the routes taken by the dogs, there are attached four images/maps of the area of the Ocean Club resort, the route taken by the dogs from Block 5 to the car park being marked in red and yellow.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/INFORMATION-SERVICE.htm
The photograph described is filed here;
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MAPS_PJ.htm#p3p829
I've found (I think) what I was looking for G-Unit.
Snip
Then it gets silly. They turned left again and headed towards the road. At the road they turned left again, and headed towards the T Junction. They then crossed the road to the wall of Block 6, turned right and headed towards the car park south of Block 6. It's unlikely that Madeleine or an abductor took that route. I wonder what the dogs were following? What a shame they can't talk
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.msg306176#msg306176
The dog headed left UP the hill to the main road, where it crossed the road. Both handlers stated that.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.msg306233#msg306233
I have looked closely at the dog handler's statement, and there is actually a mistranslation. The dogs turned left after exiting the alleyway. I have posted about it previously, I'll try to find it later.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.msg306234#msg306234
Yes "fechada" obviously here means "locked".
So the scent trail of a missing child is tracked by one dog to the outer door of that reception building, and that tracking is then abandoned, just because the door was locked, so the dog is unable to continue tracking!
And so the dog team never finds out whether the child had entered that door, whether the child then also went through the inner door, whether the child continued into the pools area. If I was the officer in charge I would have urgently requested a key.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.msg306759#msg306759
Maybe I went too far in stating 'agreement' ... but that was how I remembered it. If it is correct that the dogs turned left and uphill before turning right and progressing down hill ... it makes the illustration of the route they followed inaccurate.
Similarly if one also progressed to the door of reception and the tapas area.
Why do you think she walked that way every day John?
The air scenting dogs might have helped if Madeleine had gone into open country (seriously wandered off) or if the abductor was carrying her across country.
As they couldn't lock the patio door from the outside I assumed they all left by the main door of 5a, accessing the car park at the front, walked around the block and down the road in order to gain access via mini reception to the grounds and the twins club beyond. After leaving the twins off at their club, retracing their steps and going out via mini reception, across the road towards main reception and Madeleine's club which was located on the floor above it.
Didn't the GNR tracker dogs follow this route too?
The patrol dogs would have been used initially simply to search for human scent in out of the way places like down dry culverts, in abandoned buildings and gardens and on rough ground surrounding the town. The second lot of dogs from the GNR school could track a scent regardless of whether it was ground or air borne. To do this they required a target scent thus why the officers asked for something belonging to the missing child.OK you use the term "patrol dogs" for the ones working off leash the "air scenting dogs". Looking for human smell in general, so that would not mean much in areas where many people had obviously been in the last day or so.
It gets to the heart of my theory if the tracker dogs come up to the door of the secondary reception and it is not opened. Are they bluffed off by a staff member saying "that door has been locked all night she can't be through there". Some staff have keys, and staff members had been in the kids bedroom when there were few people in the apartment.
I've found (I think) what I was looking for G-Unit.
Snip
Then it gets silly. They turned left again and headed towards the road. At the road they turned left again, and headed towards the T Junction. They then crossed the road to the wall of Block 6, turned right and headed towards the car park south of Block 6. It's unlikely that Madeleine or an abductor took that route. I wonder what the dogs were following? What a shame they can't talk
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.msg306176#msg306176
The dog headed left UP the hill to the main road, where it crossed the road. Both handlers stated that.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.msg306233#msg306233
I have looked closely at the dog handler's statement, and there is actually a mistranslation. The dogs turned left after exiting the alleyway. I have posted about it previously, I'll try to find it later.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.msg306234#msg306234
Yes "fechada" obviously here means "locked".
So the scent trail of a missing child is tracked by one dog to the outer door of that reception building, and that tracking is then abandoned, just because the door was locked, so the dog is unable to continue tracking!
And so the dog team never finds out whether the child had entered that door, whether the child then also went through the inner door, whether the child continued into the pools area. If I was the officer in charge I would have urgently requested a key.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1620.msg306759#msg306759
Maybe I went too far in stating 'agreement' ... but that was how I remembered it. If it is correct that the dogs turned left and uphill before turning right and progressing down hill ... it makes the illustration of the route they followed inaccurate.
Similarly if one also progressed to the door of reception and the tapas area.
It gets to the heart of my theory if the tracker dogs come up to the door of the secondary reception and it is not opened. Are they bluffed off by a staff member saying "that door has been locked all night she can't be through there". Some staff have keys, and staff members had been in the kids bedroom when there were few people in the apartment.You are pushing the libel test to its limit, or beyond.
1. If we are not sure who we are tracking (unsure whether it was Madeleine or not).
2. And it leads to a reception door
3. And the door is not opened by OC staff.
4. Could that point to at least the possibility of the OC staff being involved in the concealment of the person the dogs were tracking (regardless of whether it was Madeleine or not)?
OK you use the term "patrol dogs" for the ones working off leash the "air scenting dogs". Looking for human smell in general, so that would not mean much in areas where many people had obviously been in the last day or so.
It gets to the heart of my theory if the tracker dogs come up to the door of the secondary reception and it is not opened. Are they bluffed off by a staff member saying "that door has been locked all night she can't be through there". Some staff have keys, and staff members had been in the kids bedroom when there were few people in the apartment.
1. If we are not sure who we are tracking (unsure whether it was Madeleine or not).
2. And it leads to a reception door
3. And the door is not opened by OC staff.
4. Could that point to at least the possibility of the OC staff being involved in the concealment of the person the dogs were tracking (regardless of whether it was Madeleine or not)?
You are pushing the libel test to its limit, or beyond.There were people around. Perhaps they should have asked ... and done the job properly .
There is no evidence whatsoever that the GNR asked for the key, there is no evidence whatsoever that OC staff denied them a key, and there is no evidence whatsoever that OC staff said the Tapas area had been closed all night.
You cannot malign 'OC staff' when you have no evidence to do so.
The simplest explanation is that the GNR officers did not request a key. I would assume the officers would have got a key if they knew where 24hr reception was, but as to why a dog handling team would know that is beyond me.
OK you use the term "patrol dogs" for the ones working off leash the "air scenting dogs". Looking for human smell in general, so that would not mean much in areas where many people had obviously been in the last day or so.
There were people around. Perhaps they should have asked ... and done the job properly .My post was to get Robbity to cease and desist with a string of accusatory posts completely unsupported by evidence.
I'm quite sure there would have been staff there at all times so soon after the disappearance to open locked doors etc.And from their statements they were there till very late. We could get their actual words.
And from their statements they were there till very late. We could get their actual words.
24-Hour Reception had access at all times to every part of OC.Here we are talking about the secondary reception, and I know there were staff with keys for the purpose of opening up buildings.
There were people around. Perhaps they should have asked ... and done the job properly .
Were there? After 11pm on 4th?Some stayed right through to about 7:00AM next morning
Were there? After 11pm on 4th?
Don't know.
I think if the dog had been particularly insistent about the door the handler would definitely have done something about it. If not immediately, certainly as soon as it was possible
As it was, the dog redirected and crossed to the area at the car park where he lost interest just as the first dog had.
I think it possible that whatever scent was being followed had got into a parked vehicle at that point which was then driven away.
My post was to get Robbity to cease and desist with a string of accusatory posts completely unsupported by evidence.I accept your info. Thank you, I had forgotten.
The dogs in the file as tracker dogs were deployed late overnight on 4/5 May i.e. perhaps 24 hours or more after Madeleine disappeared.
As to who was around at that time, the only person, with probable access to keys, I can think of is OC 24hr reception.
This is not about whether the GNR officers should have hunted down keys (multiple) to the Tapas reception, the Tapas restaurant and Bar etc.
If you can say who these other people were, it would be a step forward.
Don't know.That is putting a lot of responsibility on the dog when you say "if the dog had been particularly insistent about the door" isn't it?
I think if the dog had been particularly insistent about the door the handler would definitely have done something about it. If not immediately, certainly as soon as it was possible
As it was, the dog redirected and crossed to the area at the car park where he lost interest just as the first dog had.
I think it possible that whatever scent was being followed had got into a parked vehicle at that point which was then driven away.
Some stayed right through to about 7:00AM next morningIt appears the Batistas stayed till around 4:00 AM http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOAO_BATISTA.htm
"He continued searching until about 04.00 when he returned home with his wife."
I accept your info. Thank you, I had forgotten.I don't know, is the basic answer.
I was thinking, it seems in error, that the tracker dogs were used on the night of May3rd/4th
This begs the question,
"Why weren't they used on the night of the 3rd/4th.?"
Don't know.This trail of scent could easily have been the other way around imo. It could have been the scent of an abductor walking to 5A rather than away.
I think if the dog had been particularly insistent about the door the handler would definitely have done something about it. If not immediately, certainly as soon as it was possible
As it was, the dog redirected and crossed to the area at the car park where he lost interest just as the first dog had.
I think it possible that whatever scent was being followed had got into a parked vehicle at that point which was then driven away.
I don't know, is the basic answer.
Roughly speaking, the local PJ seem to have turned up at 1AM on 4 May 2007, and called it a night around 4AM.
There were no signs of a forced entry.
Quite why they should have insisted on tracker dogs being deployed from Lisbon when the GNR were already out with (non-tracker) dogs is a question I cannot answer.
Who requested tracker dogs from Lisbon? I don't know.
On the 4th of May of the current year, around 22H30, he was asked to use the dogs in conjunction with a search that attempted to retrace the steps taken by the missing minor. His role was to use the dogs' skills by allowing them to sniff a towel which had supposedly been used by the minor in question.
- When questioned he stated that the search operations that he organised finished at about 04.30. Elements from the PJ and GNR reinforcements with sniffer dogs were still at the scene.
The McCanns went to the new apartment and I remember seeing Kate and Mrs Payne seated on the sofa, each holding one of the twins. I left the new apartment at 04.30 in the morning after instructions from John Hill. I was the last to leave, the police had already left, but I left my number saying that I was available for anything that might be needed.
After a short rest I returned to work at 08.00. I did not see Kate or Gerry during the whole morning, but went to the new apartment at about lunchtime. Kate and Gerry were not there but there were other members of the group taking care of the twins.
So is this an error in translation?Lagos GNR deployed non-tracker dogs in the early hours of 4 May.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PEDRO_ESTEVES.htm
That the time "around 22H30" refers to time he was called ie around 22H30 on the 3rd, but by the time he arrive it was after midnight so the searching occurred on the 4th. On the that morning the OC staff were available to at least 4:00 AM if not later.
In John Hill's statement http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_HILL.htm
That is 4:30 AM on the morning of the 4th I presume. Sniffer tracker dogs were there.
Emma Knight http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA-LOUISE.htm
That is putting a lot of responsibility on the dog when you say "if the dog had been particularly insistent about the door" isn't it?
This trail of scent could easily have been the other way around imo. It could have been the scent of an abductor walking to 5A rather than away.
We dont know if the blanket or towel shown to the dogs had the abductors scent on it too. The scent of a fearfully-sweaty man/ woman would overpower the scent of a small child.
If it were the other way round, then it would be even more interesting to know what cars had spent time on that little car park opposite the Tapas reception. I wonder if The Carpenters know ... or the people in the villas opposite?
Lagos GNR deployed non-tracker dogs in the early hours of 4 May.Can you actually prove that. I showed you the quotes I found above which show it was possibly the day before. On what basis do you say "Lisbon tracker dogs were deployed late in the evening of 4 May"
Lisbon tracker dogs were deployed late in the evening of 4 May.
Can you actually prove that. I showed you the quotes I found above which show it was possibly the day before. On what basis do you say "Lisbon tracker dogs were deployed late in the evening of 4 May"On the basis that that is how it happened. You have not shown me quotes that suggest otherwise. Read up the dog handlers statements.
I could accept an abductor touching the blanket, but it's unlikely they touched a bath towel in my opinion. It would be helpful to know what the dogs did sniff. The mother should know and she says blanket. The dog handler should also know and he says turkish bath towel. Two very different things.Initially when I read that I thought it must mean that the two teams got different items to track with.
The dog has no responsibility for anything other than doing what it is trained to do. If it was disinterested enough to leave the door and progress to the other side of the street the handler would probably have taken an inference from that.It seems a mistake to me to not go through that door when at the time of Madeleine going missing there seems to be evidence that the secondary reception was open.
On the basis that that is how it happened. You have not shown me quotes that suggest otherwise. Read up the dog handlers statements.This is a pretty comprehensive report http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm but it doesn't explain how they established Madeleine's scent.
he route initially taken was from the front entrance door to the passageway between Blocks 4 and 5, along the corridor and then along the passage that leads past the entrance to the small reception to the resort's swimming pool.OK it doesn't say they stopped at the door of the reception on the first night."then along the passage that leads past the entrance to the small reception what other meaning could that have? "then along the pathway that leads to the entrance to the secondary reception". Was that possible? Did the McCanns ever get this blanket back?
iT IS CLEAR THE FIRST TWO Tracker dogs got the blanket to sniff for Madeleine's scent and followed a very similar trail to what was found the next day.http://www.mccannfiles.com/id258.html
"Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão"
They too headed to the small reception area. OK it doesn't say they stopped at the door of the reception on the first night."then along the passage that leads past the entrance to the small reception what other meaning could that have? "then along the pathway that leads past the entrance to the secondary reception". Was that possible? Did the MacCanns ever get this blanket back?
Was that the same blanket as is seen in the photos of Madeleine's bed? So any future photos of her bed would not have had a blanket on them, or did she have a second blanket?
Interesting again. There was only one blanket, Madeleine's 'princess' blanket brought with them on holiday. According to Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacão he arrived at 2.30am on 4th with his dog and was given the blanket shortly afterwards. We have to assume, therefore, that the photos of the apartment were taken before that because the blanket is on the bed. The twins are gone, as is everyone else unless they waited outside and then went back in afterwards.So do you think she went back down to 5A to get the blanket for the tracking team?
According to Vitor Martins he arrived at around 1am; he and Officer Barreiras. He immediately asked the McCanns friends to leave and asked the OC services director to relocate the family. Following this the twins were moved so the site could be searched.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR_MARTINS.htm#p15p3862
According to Kate;
So the staff put up two extra cots in Fiona and David’s apartment and we carried a sleepy Sean and Amelie into their sitting room. But I needed to keep them close to me. I lowered myself down on to the couch with Fiona. She took a twin from me and we both sat there hugging my children.
[Madeleine]
Did Kate go to the Payne's a while before 2.30am, then? She must have, to allow time for the photographer, Officer Barreiras, to take his photos showing the blanket on the bed. She doesn't mention returning to the apartment after arriving at the Payne's, but she must have done in order to;
I fetched the pink princess blanket she took to bed with her every night, which they took, and some of her clothes, which they didn’t.
[Madeleine]
She also gives the impression that she was in the apartment when the PJ left;
The next thing I knew, the PJ officers were heading for the front door. I felt another surge of panic. When I asked them anxiously where they were going, they said they had finished for tonight
[Madeleine]
I don't know if Jane Tanner ever mentioned a blanket. It certainly wasn't mentioned on 4th May;Does Crecheman say he wrapped his child in a pink blanket?
About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm
Perhaps that blanket was one of those myths?
Because it was only in 2013 that SY identified the girl seen by JT and photographed that girl's blanket.So can we see crecheman's blanket?
So do you think she went back down to 5A to get the blanket for the tracking team?
Does Crecheman say he wrapped his child in a pink blanket?
Pegasus reports http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5018.msg186386#msg186386So can we see crecheman's blanket?
Does Crecheman say he wrapped his child in a pink blanket?
Pegasus reports http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5018.msg186386#msg186386So can we see crecheman's blanket?
So if we were to get SY to check that blanket for pollen grains it would show a pattern that would confirm it was in PDL in the month of May? I find it odd that a specific pair of pyjamas were kept. Have they been washed since then?
So if we were to get SY to check that blanket for pollen grains it would show a pattern that would confirm it was in PDL in the month of May? I find it odd that a specific pair of pyjamas were kept. Have they been washed since then?
Others don't find it odd to keep a child's clothes for 6 years. I do, but I'm not one for keeping things. SY seemed keen to suggest that they had found the man and his child's clothes. Whether they bothered with any checks such as yu suggest we don't know. The blanket could easily have been there, but that doesn't place it near G5A at about 9.15pm.They might have got the clothes back but not the blanket. So in that case the blanket is just a replacement.
we could ask that question again with a colour change:
"If Tannerman's child had a white blanket with her and Madeleine's pink blanket was photographed still on her bed,why did anyone ever believe Tannermans child was Madeleine in the first place?"
They might have got the clothes back but not the blanket. So in that case the blanket is just a replacement.G-unit and others pursuing this line of evidence. What I want to find is whether the PJ or the GNR ever gave the pink blanket back to the McCanns or did they keep it. Like we need a cite to show they picked it up and we have that so do we also need a cite to show they gave it back? The towel was obviously the property of OC and that could have been handed into the OC for laundering so there is no real mystery there but where is the proof they handed the pink blanket back?
G-unit and others pursuing this line of evidence. What I want to find is whether the PJ or the GNR ever gave the pink blanket back to the McCanns or did they keep it. Like we need a cite to show they picked it up and we have that so do we also need a cite to show they gave it back? The towel was obviously the property of OC and that could have been handed into the OC for laundering so there is no real mystery there but where is the proof they handed the pink blanket back?
You find it. Let me know when you have. Merci beaucoup.It did seem to feature in later videos but was that from a position of "handed back" or "retained as evidence". I couldn't tell. If Eddie had alerted to the blanket in these later videos I would have wondered how Kate would have explained that?
It did seem to feature in later videos but was that from a position of "handed back" or "retained as evidence". I couldn't tell. If Eddie had alerted to the blanket in these later videos I would have wondered how Kate would have explained that?
She must have done if she carried the twins up to the Payne's because they went before the photos were taken which were taken before the blanket was given to the dog handler. Logic.This seems like an event Kate would remember doing so it possible for SY to confirm the order of events even if they are not clear to us ATM.
Fiona said;
I can't remember who carried up Sean and Amelie. Erm, and we sat on the sofa, me and Kate with the twins asleep on us for a while,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/FIONA-PAYNE-ROGATORY.htm
She doesn't mention Kate leaving again. Her next recollection is deciding to try to rest at about 4.30am.
Dianne said;
“And err eventually when err Dave and Fiona came back and I can’t remember if they came back carrying the twins or whether they came back first and said the twins are coming up here I can’t remember, err but the twins appeared err in our apartment, they were put down to sleep. That was when the Police had cordoned off the apartment and err Kate and Gerry came up.”
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANE-WEBSTER-2.htm
What? Handed back or retained as evidence? Where did you get that from? Perhaps you could provide a Cite."Handed back or retained as evidence?" That is the question we are trying to answer. We don't have a cite but the blanket is in one video back in the McCann's villa. Has it been handed back at that stage or are the PJ doing further tests on it?
Jane Tanner didn't see a blanket, she saw a pair of legs.The implication (by showing us the blanket) is that some part of the child is covered with a blanket
"Handed back or retained as evidence?" That is the question we are trying to answer. We don't have a cite but the blanket is in one video back in the McCann's villa. Has it been handed back at that stage or are the PJ doing further tests on it?Do you have any evidence that Portuguese forensic staff ever conducted any test on it?
"Handed back or retained as evidence?" That is the question we are trying to answer. We don't have a cite but the blanket is in one video back in the McCann's villa. Has it been handed back at that stage or are the PJ doing further tests on it?
The blanket was never seen in The McCann's villa. Please do try to do some research. Because you are seriously beginning to piss me off.It is clearly seen in the wardrobe of the Villa they rented.with Eddie doing cadaver odour testing on it.
Whoops. Sorry. Belay the last pipe.
It is clearly seen in the wardrobe of the Villa they rented.with Eddie doing cadaver odour testing on it.
Which Villa?The one where Eddie alerted to Cuddle Cat.
The one where Eddie alerted to Cuddle Cat.
No pink blanket ever seen there.I'll find it again. Do you think the McCanns never got it back? Is that why you are so sure "no pink blanket ever seen there".
I have made two suggestions, but seems you have dismissed them.You were right I must have missed them. All possible.
I suggest that the dogs were following either:
1) The scent of Madeleines footsteps earlier that day or on another day. Her footsteps would have a stronger scent than the air scent from her being carried
2) The towel / blanket was handled by a sweaty abductor / lifter of Madeleine, and his/her scent was stronger than Madeleines scent. The dogs did not follow Madeleines scent per se, but the sweaty smell of fear from the abductor/lifter, possibly on his way to 5A rather than from 5A.
3) or ... Madeleine had been passed, from lifter to Tannerman, over the wall immediately in front of 5A ... and the dogs followed the main scent at nose height, along the walled walkway. This scent was of the lifter + a twee whiff of Madeleine
I have made two suggestions, but seems you have dismissed them.
I suggest that the dogs were following either:
1) The scent of Madeleines footsteps earlier that day or on another day. Her footsteps would have a stronger scent than the air scent from her being carried
2) The towel / blanket was handled by a sweaty abductor / lifter of Madeleine, and his/her scent was stronger than Madeleines scent. The dogs did not follow Madeleines scent per se, but the sweaty smell of fear from the abductor/lifter, possibly on his way to 5A rather than from 5A.
3) or ... Madeleine had been passed, from lifter to Tannerman, over the wall immediately in front of 5A ... and the dogs followed the main scent at nose height, along the walled walkway. This scent was of the lifter + a twee whiff of Madeleine
so does that mean the abductor was sweaty and used madleenes bath towel to wipe his hands on? And then wiped them on her blanket? As well?Madeleines cuddle blanket was removed from her arms, presumably by the lifter, so his sweaty smell would be on it.
Madeleines cuddle blanket was removed from her arms, presumably by the lifter, so his sweaty smell would be on it.
Madeleines towel may well have been on the bottom of the bed and could have been used to wipe his hands or he might have done a simple thing like accidentally knock it to the floor and pick it up out of the way.
We just dont know ... and need to be open minded about the situation.
When was it in her arms? Gerry says it was on top of her head at 9.10 as it was when they out her go sleepAn open mind is what you need, mercury, to think around things a bit.
All the rest is speculation, we just dont want speculation without evidence sadie.
An open mind is what you need, mercury, to think around things a bit.
Childrens favourite blankets are for cuddling, usually by their faces, in my experience
Were there? After 11pm on 4th?This is something I'll have to keep an eye open for. but nothing so far.
I'm quite sure there would have been staff there at all times so soon after the disappearance to open locked doors etc. If the GNR didn't search an area obviously they saw no point in doing so.They ended up searching miles around PdL and failed to search a building the dogs tracked to. That seems a fatal flaw in their thinking IMO.
I have made two suggestions, but seems you have dismissed them.
I suggest that the dogs were following either:
1) The scent of Madeleines footsteps earlier that day or on another day. Her footsteps would have a stronger scent than the air scent from her being carried
2) The towel / blanket was handled by a sweaty abductor / lifter of Madeleine, and his/her scent was stronger than Madeleines scent. The dogs did not follow Madeleines scent per se, but the sweaty smell of fear from the abductor/lifter, possibly on his way to 5A rather than from 5A.
3) or ... Madeleine had been passed, from lifter to Tannerman, over the wall immediately in front of 5A ... and the dogs followed the main scent at nose height, along the walled walkway. This scent was of the lifter + a twee whiff of Madeleine
You now need a theory to explain what your sweaty abductor/lifter was doing upstairs in blocks 4 and 5 at and near apartments connected with the Paynes and the McCanns.If you go to the summary statement of that report:
The tracker dogs were taken into apartment blocks 4 and 5 on 8th May. They were given the towel to sniff and;
It is certain...that the dog signalled next to apartments 5J, 5H, and 4G. He showed great interest in sniffing these doors and the immediate areas.
He did not show any interest or even approach other apartments.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_SILVA.htm
The dog did not demonstrate to its owner that it had found the scent it was searching for.it sounds like any indication was not intense enough to be sure.
If you go to the summary statement of that report:it sounds like any indication was not intense enough to be sure.
G-unit It was the same one.
Oh? I didn't find your exact quote but I did find a similar one. It's not really important anyway as the conclusion applies to all the work done by the tracker dogs, so it all has equal value.Just out of curiosity what does your version say? I had that the other day where the same link seemed to point to two different versions of the file. I would have no idea how that could happen.
Just out of curiosity what does your version say? I had that the other day where the same link seemed to point to two different versions of the file. I would have no idea how that could happen.
mine says "The dog did not demonstrate to its owner that it had found the scent it was searching for. "
If you provided links this discussion could have been avoided! You were not looking at the same statement I quoted, despite your protestations!Thanks for answering G-unit but I still don't feel at fault for in the post I responded to you from you were quoting Silva not Esteves. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=post;quote=354104;topic=1279.300;last_msg=354165
They did not demonstrate that they had detected the odour in question.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PEDRO_ESTEVES.htm
The dog did not demonstrate to its owner that it had found the scent it was searching for.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_SILVA.htm
Thanks for answering G-unit but I still don't feel at fault for in the post I responded to you from you were quoting Silva not Esteves. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=post;quote=354104;topic=1279.300;last_msg=354165
You're right, I apologise. I was working from more than one statement the time. Now I've completely lost track of what I was saying and why. @)(++(*Thanks for that. I think both dog handlers agree the alerts weren't strong enough to indicate that they need take the dogs inside these apartments where there was a partial alert. We'll never know if there was a reason for this backdown but it was a mistake IMO. But we can't turn the clock back now.
I think my point was that the tracking along the path and the interest in certain apartments by the dogs were equally valid [or equally invalid].
Thanks for that. I think both dog handlers agree the alerts weren't strong enough to indicate that they need take the dogs inside these apartments where there was a partial alert. We'll never know if there was a reason for this backdown but it was a mistake IMO. But we can't turn the clock back now.
I don't know what the dogs alerted to.Well it may have been or may not have been so when I look for a solution I think all possible solutions have to be looked at. So it was in an exercise like that that I came up with a new theory.
But it wasn't anything to do with Madeleine.
I don't know what the dogs alerted to.
But it wasn't anything to do with Madeleine.
Oh, hello! You'll be pleased to learn that we have discovered during your absence that you were mistaken; tracker dogs were used in the GNR search on 4th May at 11.30pm.
If you read the posts since you disappeared you will see that the dogs didn't alert. The handler's opinion was that his tracker dog followed the scent from the towel, however, so if the scent belonged to Madeleine....................:
Taking into account the aforementioned result, he states that it can be confirmed with a certain degree of certainty that the missing minor passed that location, on the day of the events or before that date.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PEDRO_ESTEVES.htm
[The handler] states it should be noted that the second dog may have been conditioned by the original path taken by the first sniffer dog as he may have smelled the first dog's path taken.
The quote above suggests a (possible) explanation of why the two dogs reacted the same.No these two dog were trained to track individual scents.
None of this detracts from the central point: the Portuguese deployed air-scenting dogs (that do not track the individual and unique scent).
The quote above suggests a (possible) explanation of why the two dogs reacted the same.
None of this detracts from the central point: the Portuguese deployed air-scenting dogs (that do not track the individual and unique scent).
Three dogs followed the same path on 5 separate outings. One patrol dog [with some tracking training] at 2.30am on 4th, following the scent on the pink blanket. Two TRACKING dogs at 11,30pm on 4th following the scent on the towel, repeated on 8th by the two TRACKING DOGS. What a coincidence!!!What inference do you take from that?
I admire your tenacity in sticking to your beliefs, but it won't wash, I'm afraid. The evidence is quite clear.
*&*%£ *&*%£ *&*%£
I don't know what the dogs alerted to.
But it wasn't anything to do with Madeleine.
Which dogs are you talking about and what time of day was it?
We are conditioned to think that the starting point for the dogs was the doorway of apartment 5A. It may have been the end point.
The route could have started at the point where the dogs lost interest which was the car park ... it could also have finished at the same point.
The dogs are good but not enough to be able to determine the direction of travel of whatever scent it is they pick up on.
I remain mystified why 5J was not accessed immediately given the level of interest shown by the dogs.
We are conditioned to think that the starting point for the dogs was the doorway of apartment 5A. It may have been the end point.
The route could have started at the point where the dogs lost interest which was the car park ... it could also have finished at the same point.
The dogs are good but not enough to be able to determine the direction of travel of whatever scent it is they pick up on.
I remain mystified why 5J was not accessed immediately given the level of interest shown by the dogs.
Which dogs are you talking about and what time of day was it?
If it is the tracker dogs, since that unit seems to have arrived around 11pm, I would assume the issues with 5J were no key (got round by access from a neighbour via the rear balcony and patio doors) and the time of night.
The starting point for the dogs was the doorway of 5A because that's where the child disappeared from. I think you mean the scent.
Whatever scent the dogs followed they followed the strongest example of it from [or to] the front door. They then reached R F G Martins; the scent crossing the road to or from block 6 may have been laid on a different day, as might the scent to or from the Tapas Entrance.
Whoever's scent they were following was present on both the princess blanket and the towel.
Whoever's scent was on the towel may have visited 4G.
Madeleine never visited 4G or if she did witnesses forgot to mention it.
I meant exactly what I wrote. The clue may be in the words "starting point" and "finishing point". Also "The dogs are good but not enough to be able to determine the direction of travel of whatever scent it is they pick up on."
If I didn't know better I would think your post an attempt to patronise me. I am sure that was not your intent; however it seems you have completely misunderstood my attempt at lateral thinking since you have completely avoided comment on what I actually wrote.
The starting point for the dogs was the doorway of 5A because that's where the child disappeared from. I think you mean the scent.Are you starting to think like I do?
Whatever scent the dogs followed they followed the strongest example of it from [or to] the front door. They then reached R F G Martins; the scent crossing the road to or from block 6 may have been laid on a different day, as might the scent to or from the Tapas Entrance.
Whoever's scent they were following was present on both the princess blanket and the towel.
Whoever's scent was on the towel may have visited 4G.
Madeleine never visited 4G or if she did witnesses forgot to mention it.
Are you starting to think like I do?
No, I'm thinking like I do.I'm starting to like the way you are thinking then. For that is a real challenging two sentences
"Whoever's scent was on the towel may have visited 4G.
Madeleine never visited 4G or if she did witnesses forgot to mention it."
I'm starting to like the way you are thinking then. For that is a real challenging two sentences
Nah!List the different type of tracking dogs there are:
Ground-scenting dogs don't track the individual and unique scent (of a given hguman-being.
The GNR handlers had ground-scenting dogs ....
List the different type of tracking dogs there are:
Patrol dogs (Crowd control)
Air scenting ( look for a lost human - not a specific person)
Ground scenting - tracking a specific person after sniffing their scent. (These were used on the 4th late that night)
All dogs instinctively have some tracking ability.
There are dogs that sniff out explosives and drugs.You can be sure dogs with those skills were not brought to PdL in the hunt for Madeleine McCann.
I believe there are dogs that can detect counter-fit money?
(not entirely sure about that).
I'm sure there are more ....
http://plrplr.com/1875/does-counterfeit-money-smell-different-from-real-money/
Three dogs followed the same path on 5 separate outings. One patrol dog [with some tracking training] at 2.30am on 4th, following the scent on the pink blanket. Two TRACKING dogs at 11,30pm on 4th following the scent on the towel, repeated on 8th by the two TRACKING DOGS. What a coincidence!!!
I admire your tenacity in sticking to your beliefs, but it won't wash, I'm afraid. The evidence is quite clear.
*&*%£ *&*%£ *&*%£
What inference do you take from that?
I personally see the same scent showing 4 days after the event, on the 3rd , 4th and 8th, so the scent has lasted at least 4 days.
To me that means that it could have been there a good few days before the third .... so it actually means nowt about Madeleine being taken anywhere. TBH
I agree with that, Sadie.
The dogs were following a scent ~ but what that was is known only to them.
I think that because they did not follow the route taken by Tannerman the reckoning was that that sighting was not connected to Madeleine's disappearance.
How different history might have been had the dogs followed the Tannerman route to Crecheman's door or another car park. Murat might have been saved a lot of grief, Amaral might still have been in the PJ and the investigation might have followed a more positive line than it ultimately did.
I agree with that, Sadie.
The dogs were following a scent ~ but what that was is known only to them.
I think that because they did not follow the route taken by Tannerman the reckoning was that that sighting was not connected to Madeleine's disappearance.
How different history might have been had the dogs followed the Tannerman route to Crecheman's door or another car park. Murat might have been saved a lot of grief, Amaral might still have been in the PJ and the investigation might have followed a more positive line than it ultimately did.
I think we know a little bit more than that. There was some confusion, but whatever scent they followed seemed to have been on Madeleine's princess blanket and on a bath towel, according to the handlers who were given the items.Instead of stood by a lamp post, I think it more likely that s/he/they got into or out of a vehicle here. I think the scent was of the feet of the abductors.
If [and I do mean if] that scent is what they found and followed they were following someone who;
handled both items
walked the path
crossed the road
stood by a lamp post next to the car park
visited the Tapas reception
went to 5H
went to or near 5J
went to 4G
didn't go to any other apartments in blocks 4 and 5
Instead of stood by a lamp post, I think it more likely that s/he/they got into or out of a vehicle here. I think the scent was of the feet of the abductors.
I haven't checked the others but I am assuming that you got them right?
Instead of stood by a lamp post, I think it more likely that s/he/they got into or out of a vehicle here. I think the scent was of the feet of the abductors.Who would have access to these apartments and also a car? Did ... ..... have access to a car? It would be strange for someone living in block 4 to park a car in block 6. You can't have ... and a car unless he had access to a friends car in Block 6.
I haven't checked the others but I am assuming that you got them right?
Instead of stood by a lamp post, I think it more likely that s/he/they got into or out of a vehicle here. I think the scent was of the feet of the abductors.
I haven't checked the others but I am assuming that you got them right?
As Madeleine didn't take her shoes, it would make more sense if it were her feet.
I think we know a little bit more than that. There was some confusion, but whatever scent they followed seemed to have been on Madeleine's princess blanket and on a bath towel, according to the handlers who were given the items.
If [and I do mean if] that scent is what they found and followed they were following someone who;
handled both items
walked the path
crossed the road
stood by a lamp post next to the car park
visited the Tapas reception
went to 5H
went to or near 5J
went to 4G
didn't go to any other apartments in blocks 4 and 5
Those places would indicate any of the other 4 McCanns plus possibly Emma Knight (the Hotel Manager).
Look at it from another angle after considering the limitation of the positive tracking - why didn't the dogs track the routes Madeleine was known to have taken during the day, especially around the swimming pool where she was barefoot?
IMO whoever's scent the dogs were following, it certainly wasn't Madeleine's.
Those places would indicate any of the other 4 McCanns plus possibly Emma Knight (the Hotel Manager).How would they track around the pool if they could not get into the Tapas area because it was locked?
Look at it from another angle after considering the limitation of the positive tracking - why didn't the dogs track the routes Madeleine was known to have taken during the day, especially around the swimming pool where she was barefoot?
IMO whoever's scent the dogs were following, it certainly wasn't Madeleine's.
Those places would indicate any of the other 4 McCanns plus possibly Emma Knight (the Hotel Manager).
Look at it from another angle after considering the limitation of the positive tracking - why didn't the dogs track the routes Madeleine was known to have taken during the day, especially around the swimming pool where she was barefoot?
IMO whoever's scent the dogs were following, it certainly wasn't Madeleine's.
It's all hypothetical, because we just can't be sure what they were tracking or whether they were following the same scent all the time, but I'm assuming they did and then trying to make logical deductions.
Why would an abductor go to the Tapas entrance and upstairs in blocks 4 and 5?
How would they track around the pool if they could not get into the Tapas area because it was locked?
They certainly had an interest in following a particular scent, Misty; like you, I don't think it was Madeleine's.Are you allowed to say who think they might be tracking?
Are you allowed to say who think they might be tracking?
I'm not the arbiter of what you can and cannot post, Robittybob1. As long as it complies with forum rules, that decision is entirely yours :)I was asking you who you thought it could be.
I was asking you who you thought it could be.
Hmmm ... I have no idea whatsoever ...
The unnamed person who handed the towel to the S&R dog handlers?OK. To know that towel was used by Madeleine would make it either Kate or Gerry. So to have Gerry's or Kate's scent on it is not beyond belief. Surely when the dog handlers acquired the towel they took precautions not to add additional scents on it. Still doesn't make sense to be either of the two of them.
OK. To know that towel was used by Madeleine would make it either Kate or Gerry. So to have Gerry's or Kate's scent on it is not beyond belief. Surely when the dog handlers acquired the towel they took precautions not to add additional scents on it. Still doesn't make sense to be either of the two of them.
I like the way you analyse the situation G-unit.Yep a good analysis, Gunit
Yep a good analysis, GunitI think G-unit already factored that in, but I'll let her answer that.
BUT it leaves out the fact that a smelly sweaty abductor would have handled the cuddle blanket and might have lifted the towel if on the bed, as well
Thank you both.
In support of your theory, Sadie, is an item which could be a towel draped over the bottom of one of the cots in the 5A photos. Kate may have taken Madeleine to the bedroom in the towel to put her pyjamas on. Against your theory is finding an explanation as to why a smelly abductor may have been to 5H and 4G.
I would guess that the scent followed was not one of the T7. Their most recent scent trails would be in or out of block 5, so the dogs should have entered the block if they were following one of their scents. They passed the entrance.
Gerry entered block 5 also on the evening of 3rd when he searched upstairs with Rachael. [in her rog interview]
I'm not sure if Kate went in or not.
So, provisionally, we're left with Kate or someone unknown.
Kate & Gerry both went into the apartment via the side gate after Madeleine went missing. The dogs did not follow that scent trail.
I assume they would follow the strongest freshest or easiest to find scent, which must have been the one crossing the road.
This particular effort made in the hope of locating Madeleine is an irrelevance to that.
The dogs undoubtedly followed something which was of interest to them all. Nothing was made of it at the time, except that in the eyes of the investigation it diverted attention specifically from the route taken by the man Jane Tanner had seen.
At this remove there is no hope of second guessing what they actually followed.
When the road was crossed was that as a result of following traffic to the apartment or from the apartment or both?
There's not much hope of using the forum to locate Madeleine in my opinion.
We have clarified what type of dogs were used and what they did. We know what items they sniffed. It's possible they followed someone carrying the child out of the front door and along the path if two scents were on the items sniffed.
It's a good job they didn't follow Tannerman as he seems to have been a red herring. If he was a holidaymaker he didn't even enter block 5 car park.
Long before DCI Redwood suggested who Tannerman might have been, the Portuguese investigation appears to have dismissed him because the dogs showed no interest in his route.
Had the dogs shown an interest it is possible a more diligent search could have turned up creche man ... if indeed it was he ... and the investigation progressed from there.
The dogs in this instance merely reinforced an opinion which had already been formulated, if what Amaral has said about it in his book is considered accurate.
Amaral pays little attention to the sniffer dogs in his book; he doesn't mention them in relation to the Tanner sighting. I understood Jane Tanner was perceived to have changed her story, embellished it and so on. Also the fact that she wasn't seen by Gerry and Jez.
What?
Have you read chapter 16 of the book?
Why would Amaral tie in reference to the dogs and reference to Jane Tanner's sighting?
I wuld appreciate a cite. I think you're talking about the UK dogs.
I was. I thought you were too?
But you were talking about the Portuguese dogs?
If it was creche man he has come from the creche.
If it was another tenant he/she has come from his/her apartment.
If it was an abductor he has come from the apartment 5A.
Only one of those would be tracked by the tracker dogs if the towel was Madeleine's.
But just whose scent were the tracker dogs tracking? Did the towel have the scent of the almost certainly sweaty lifter/abductor on it?Well can we take a guess and say it didn't have Tanner sighting scent on it. For they did not go along that road.
Well can we take a guess and say it didn't have Tanner sighting on it. For they did not go along that road.Not at the time of the Tanner sighting, but did the person or persons allegedly involved walk that way from a vehicle .... which I think was likely parked on the parking area opposite the Tapas Reception and adjacent to the rear gate of the western end of block 6?
Not at the time of the Tanner sighting, but did the person or persons allegedly involved walk that way from a vehicle .... which I think was likely parked on the parking area opposite the Tapas Reception and adjacent to the rear gate of the western end of block 6?I think that is an option we'll have to consider - cars leaving the carpark.
This precisely where the dogs scented to.
I think that is an option we'll have to consider - cars leaving the carpark.I dont think that Tannerman ever intended to walk around PdL with Madeleine in his arms. He expected to be picked up by a get away vehicle parked in the little parking area opposite the Tapas Reception. He probably waited a short time in the dark areas of the front car park ready to be picked up at the entrance to block 5 car park
I dont think that Tannerman ever intended to walk around PdL with Madeleine in his arms. He expected to be picked up by a get away vehicle parked in the little parking area opposite the Tapas Reception. He probably waited a short time in the dark areas of the front car park ready to be picked up at the entrance to block 5 car park
I think the driver of the vehicle left the car park intent on picking Tannerman and Madeleine up, but saw Gerry talking to Jez in the way so dallied ... and then saw Jane witness Tannerman with Madeleine.
I think that Tannerman, with Madeleine in his arms, was fraught with anxiety at the delay, so was walking to the corner to see what had happened to the get away vehicle .... when Jane suddenly appeared. He made a rapid decision to walk across the road and quickly disappear from her vision.
On seeing this, the get away driver took fright and drove off in the opposite direction (south).
So leaving Tannerman in the lurch ... holding the baby, so to speak.
If you're suggesting that the dogs were following the scent down the path of people involved in an abduction you have to explain the dogs' interest in 5H and 4G after sniffing the very same scent source.Was 4G immediately opposite 5A ...near where the fags were found on the balcony ?
I dont think that Tannerman ever intended to walk around PdL with Madeleine in his arms. He expected to be picked up by a get away vehicle parked in the little parking area opposite the Tapas Reception. He probably waited a short time in the dark areas of the fronmt car park ready to be picked up at the entrance to block 5 car park
I think the driver of the vehicle left the car park intent on picking Tannerman and Madeleine up, but saw Gerry talking to Jez in the way so dallied ... and then saw Jane witness Tannerman with Madeleine.
I think that Tannerman, with Madeleine in his arms, was fraught with anxiety at the delay, so was walking to the corner to see what had happened to the get away vehicle .... when Jane suddenly appeared. He made a rapid decision to walk across the road and quickly disappear from her vision.
On seeing this, the get away driver took fright and drove off in the opposite direction (south).
So leaving Tannerman in the lurch ... holding the baby, so to speak.
If you're suggesting that the dogs were following the scent down the path of people involved in an abduction you have to explain the dogs' interest in 5H and 4G after sniffing the very same scent source.5H is where the Payne's stayed.
Was 4G immediately opposite 5A ...near where the fags were found on the balcony ?
Was apartment where IIRC Mrs Fenns niece observed two men on a balcony looking towards 5A?
Or
The apartment where a man was observed coming down the back garden and looking around himself before very quietly shutting the garden gate ? He was unaware that he was being watched.
None of the above. 5H was upstairs in block 5, 4G was upstairs in block 4. The Paynes were in 5H, the McCanns in 4G from 5th May. Looking from the Tapas restaurant across the pool block 4 is on the left, block 5 on the right.Thank you Gunit.
Thank you Gunit.http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/INFORMATION-SERVICE.htm
So did the Mccanns take the cuddle blanket and the towel with them when they moved to the Paynes at 5H and later to 4G ?
Did the dogs follow the scent of the blanket and the towel?
Can the experts on the PT dogs please tell us when the PT dogs went to 5H and to 4G?
Search by GNR dog team
- As you know, yesterday, 8 May 2007 at 23h45, the undersigned joined a search effected by the GNR dog team which targeted Blocks 5 and 4 of the Ocean Club resort and adjacent areas, with the objective of trying to reconstruct the possible route taken by the missing child on 3 May 2007.
None of the above. 5H was upstairs in block 5, 4G was upstairs in block 4. The Paynes were in 5H, the McCanns in 4G from 5th May. Looking from the Tapas restaurant across the pool block 4 is on the left, block 5 on the right.
Search by GNR dog team
- As you know, yesterday, 8 May 2007 at 23h45, the undersigned joined a search effected by the GNR dog team which targeted Blocks 5 and 4 of the Ocean Club resort and adjacent areas, with the objective of trying to reconstruct the possible route taken by the missing child on 3 May 2007.
Ah, so it is quite possible that the tracker dogs of May 8th followed the scent of the blanket and towel, rather than follow the scent of any person.Not really because these items were held by the dog team handlers. There is no record of the McCanns getting these items back.
Not really because these items were held by the dog team handlers. There is no record of the McCanns getting these items back.Where does it say that Rob ?
Where does it say that Rob ?It says the item was put in a plastic bag. But there is no record that i have seen where the items are returned. I read there were two dog teams (GNR and The PJ) so I assume one had the blanket and the other the towel. I could be wrong but that is my understanding ATM.
Seems the first GNR team with dogs arrived around 02.30am on the 4 May and were given a pink/orange comfort blanket to assist their search while the next team arrived at around 11pm on the 4 May and were given the Turkish bath towel which had apparently been used to dry Madeleine after her bath.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-LACAO.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_SILVA.htm
I'd just like to know who gave the S&R dog handlers the towel, as it doesn't appear to have been one of the McCanns.How would anyone know Madeleine had used it if it wasn't one of the McCanns?
How would anyone know Madeleine had used it if it wasn't one of the McCanns?
5A was a crime scene. At 11pm the McCanns were in 4G, having given their televised appeal a short while earlier.The handing over of both items were done on the first night 3-4th May. (*Correction: In the files it says the towel was picked up later that day.)
The towel was in 5A. There is no reference to either parent being asked for another item to scent during that evening. Neither of the dog handlers identifies the scenting item as being pink.
- The villa is on Rua das Flores, 27, rented at the beginning of the summer with money donated to the Find Madeleine Fund.Videos can be found http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html
Vista Mar Villa: The McCanns (02 July - 09 September 2007)
Operationally I would think it easier to have two items to track rather than one. Since they followed similar paths one could presume they had similar scents on them. But since they did not track to Madeleine there would be no inferences we could make from this.
What concerned me was that the blanket reappeared in the video of the dog searches of the Villa the McCanns hired at the end of July (??) So when was it returned was question I wanted answered.
Where can one see the Blanket at the Villa?Videos can be found http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html go to the section of Eddie doing the search at the villa and it is in the section after playing with Cuddle cat in the loungue. I haven't got the patience to go through it just at the moment.
Videos can be found http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html go to the section of Eddie doing the search at the villa and it is in the section after playing with Cuddle cat in the loungue. I haven't got the patience to go through it just at the moment.
No, nor have I. Let us know when you have.The forum should store these videos on the site before they all go missing.
They gave the dogs a Turkish bath towel which was supposedly used by the child in question
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANTONIO_SILVA.htm
That makes sense except for this bitTheir head honcho had his conviction from the word 'GO' and little doubt he passed it on to his subordinates.
How was this established? "which was supposedly used" even the PJ had their degree of uncertainty by the sound of things.
Did they use the pink blanket to get the sniffer dogs to find the towel? No parents of Madeleine involved.
I did see it on a shortened version but there is a more convincing version or at least there was. 3:20 -3:40 minutes in on the shortened video
So, No Cite then?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qG21K6XJRg 3:15 - 3:30 Edited version.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qG21K6XJRg 3:15 - 3:30 Edited version.Something pink, to which the dog did not alert?
Something pink, to which the dog did not alert?This is in August so it would have been well washed by then (in the extended video you get a better look at it iirc).
This is in August so it would have been well washed by then (in the extended video you get a better look at it iirc).Am I supposed to get interested or exited about something pink to which to dog does not alert???
Is that Madeleine's cuddle blanket?
Eddie pulls it out of the wardrobe but doesn't alert to it.
Am I supposed to get interested or exited about something pink to which to dog does not alert???As I said the better view of it was edited out. But "yes" if it was the MBM blanket and no cadaver odour on it that is a plus I'd say. A plus if you want to be able to find MBM alive.
As I said the better view of it was edited out. But "yes" if it was the MBM blanket and no cadaver odour on it that is a plus I'd say. A plus if you want to be able to find MBM alive.
Not really; if the blanket stayed on the bed in the daytime. There were no alerts in the children's bedroom at all.How does your reasoning go?
How does your reasoning go?
Am I supposed to get interested or exited about something pink to which to dog does not alert???I am interested because IMO the answer to this case could be in the finest detail.
That makes sense except for this bitSorry about quoting myself but I have just got a clue from Amaral's book
How was this established? "which was supposedly used" even the PJ had their degree of uncertainty by the sound of things.
Did they use the pink blanket to get the sniffer dogs to find the towel? No parents of Madeleine involved.
"We get them to sniff a towel which, according to Kate, was used to dry Madeleine after her bath. When the dogs finished going along block 5, when, logically, they should have been heading for block 4, they suddenly turn to the left. They then follow the path at the back that separates the apartments from the leisure area. They go quite a long way in that direction. Even if the reaction of the two dogs coincides, the trainers cannot draw any definite conclusions: in fact, it's already been more than two days since the disappearance. What they can state with certainty, is that Madeleine went along there, without being able to pinpoint the date. Gerald McCann confirms this claim: he took that same route with Madeleine a few days earlier."When I read that Kate must have said that towel had been used by Madeleine so she must have been there to identify it at some point.
@Robittybob1But as G-unit rightly pointed out (and proved by experiment) that you can't tell shades of pink in a photograph unless you compare them under the same light source.
The item in the wardrobe at the rented villa is a different shade of pink to Madeleine's blanket. You can see pink CC in photo 6 to compare shades of pink.
(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/foto5.jpg)
But as G-unit rightly pointed out (and proved by experiment) that you can't tell shades of pink in a photograph unless you compare them under the same light source.
In my studies of Cuddle Cat even the same Cuddle Cat had different shades probably due to lighting and the effectiveness of the different cameras used.
So if you look at the object itself is it a cuddle blanket? I don't even know if the view is long enough to work that out. But in the extended version I was fairly certain it was a blanket (that again is from memory) and it is too boring to go through the extended search video to find it again sorry.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg355840#msg355840
https://youtu.be/c4NMYPsFKb8?t=43In the first few minutes of that video there seems a lot of emphasis on the CC and the pink item which is most likely the blanket. Both get moved from the place where they are originally seen and placed inside an enclosed box (wardrobe or sideboard). In the first one with the blanket Martin walks away from the wardrobe the door is wide open and within a 90 seconds we come back the pink item is of the bed and the doors are shut and later the pink blanket is seen on the floor of the wardrobe.
Pink item on bed at 0.43secs.
If you run the sequence from 2m22s , you will see that the pink item is no longer on the bed. It looks the same colour as the item MG picks up from the floor but does not appear to be a blanket imo.
In the first few minutes of that video there seems a lot of emphasis on the CC and the pink item which is most likely the blanket. Both get moved from the place where they are originally seen and placed inside an enclosed box (wardrobe or sideboard). In the first one with the blanket Martin walks away from the wardrobe the door is wide open and within a 90 seconds we come back the pink item is of the bed and the doors are shut and later the pink blanket is seen on the floor of the wardrobe.
What two items have really been prominent in this case? The pink blanket and cuddlecat. To me that is proof they were targeting those two items. Proven without any doubt. That was the pink blanket from Madeleine's bed.
Have you looked at the pink item on full screen/enlarged it?I took some pictures of it. These are definitely the same location.
Have you looked at the pink item on full screen/enlarged it?
(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00438/news-graphics-2008-_438673a.jpg)(http://themohinimyth.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/44102535_ap416kate.jpg?w=300&h=216)
It wasn't a blanket; highly likely it was an item of clothing: Kate did have a pink top.
I think Robittybob1 might have something when he makes a comparison of cuddlecat being produced from within a cupboard.
Misty did I get that right you are agreeing with Brietta that it is not a blanket? Cardigans would not be labeled on a corner, but blankets do.The thing that is missing off the bed appears to almost without doubt be an article of clothing, but the thing in the wardrobe, which you can only see a little of, looks more like a blanket imo.
Misty did I get that right you are agreeing with Brietta that it is not a blanket? Cardigans would not be labeled on a corner, but blankets do.
Cardigans are usually labelled in the back of the neck or inside side seam in the UK.To me it looks like a label on a corner. => blanket Why would they take Kate's pink cardigan off the bed and put it in the wardrobe. They had no idea what Kate was wearing that night. But they do know Madeleine was snuggled up beside the blanket so it makes sense to double check if there is cadaver odour on a blanket.
As I said before, it's the wrong shade of pink to be Madeleine's blanket & the item on the bed does not look like a blanket to me.
ETA Where the heck is Pegasus when you need him?!!
To me it looks like a label on a corner. => blanket Why would they take Kate's pink cardigan off the bed and put it in the wardrobe. They had no idea what Kate was wearing that night. But they do know Madeleine was snuggled up beside the blanket so it makes sense to double check if there is cadaver odour on a blanket.
To me it looks like a label on a corner. => blanket Why would they take Kate's pink cardigan off the bed and put it in the wardrobe. They had no idea what Kate was wearing that night. But they do know Madeleine was snuggled up beside the blanket so it makes sense to double check if there is cadaver odour on a blanket.
When Kate was interviewed on 26 April last year on the Oprah Winfrey show, she made an appeal: "I hope that the abductors cover her with her blanket."Kate does say "her blanket" but I still don't think that means the pink one yet it could. I'll leave that one for Kate to explain.
....It says in the notes in the file that the blanket is used in the dog searches. If it gets lost it is then "lost " by the team. Maybe the PJ were keeping it secretly. We can't agree that we were seeing the blanket, but Kate would be able to tell us whether that pink item was her cardigan or not.
As far as the co-ordinator of the investigation was concerned, the pink blanket was missing @Aug 2007, so how could the PJ somehow produce it at the villa for Grime/Eddie yet fail to tell GA?
It says in the notes in the file that the blanket is used in the dog searches. If it gets lost it is then "lost " by the team. Maybe the PJ were keeping it secretly. We can't agree that we were seeing the blanket, but Kate would be able to tell us whether that pink item was her cardigan or not.
That would have been any old blanket will do. Kate does say "her blanket" but I still don't think that means the pink one yet it could. I'll leave that one for Kate to explain.
Maddie's blanket brings in a new lead Correio da Manhã
Kate says that the blanket was taken by the abductors, but the PJ took a photograph of it. Then it disappeared.
By: Henrique Machado/Magali Pinto
17 December 2010
Thanks to Montclair for translation
*snipped*
When Kate was interviewed on 26 April last year on the Oprah Winfrey show, she made an appeal: "I hope that the abductors cover her with her blanket." The mother of Maddie, who disappeared in Praia da Luz in 2007, was referring to the pink blanket which 4-year-old Maddie slept with every night. This same blanket was photographed by the PJ on the day following the disappearance, but it was never seen again. "If the blanket was there the next day, how was it possible for the abductors to take it. It is also with this that I will try to get the case reopened," stated Gonçalo Amaral, ex-coordinator of the PJ in Portimão.
"There are many new facts that I will hand over to the Ministério Público and which I believe to be enough to get this case, which should never have been shelved, reopened. This is one more detail. We need to know which blanket was Kate talking about, because the pink one stayed in the apartment. Now it is missing."
"All of these details will be presented to a prosecutor and I was not able to do this earlier because the McCanns prohibited me - against the Constitution - from doing so," he continued.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as the co-ordinator of the investigation was concerned, the pink blanket was missing @Aug 2007, so how could the PJ somehow produce it at the villa for Grime/Eddie yet fail to tell GA?
It wasn't Kate who referred to a blanket in the Oprah Show, it was Oprah.Oprah is quoting something that Kate had previously said. Kate doesn't deny having had previously said that.
Oprah: "Well, I, you know, I'd read something that said there were times even, you know, early on after she, errr... went missing that you would say: 'I want... I hope that whoever has her gives her her blanket'; 'I hope that whoever has her is keeping her warm'; 'I hope that whoever has her...'"
Kate: "I mean, it's funny, it's, you know, I mean... as a mum it's things like that you worry about, as well, you know. Is someone brushing her teeth? Is someone rubbing her tummy when she's not feeling well? You know, it's... it's all those things, that as a mother, you know, you do and you should be doing and..."
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id234.html
And what happened to that blanket after that?
There will be an entry in the evidence log for that ... ??there was no file called "evidence log". The other complicating factor could be the blanket was given to the GNR whereas Amaral worked for the PJ. Would that mix things up?
And what happened to that blanket after that?
there was no file called "evidence log". The other complicating factor could be the blanket was given to the GNR whereas Amaral worked for the PJ. Would that mix things up?
Ask Numi. He had it last.I was wondering that too. Could they have given it to the dog as a dog blanket. ?{)(**
Oprah is quoting something that Kate had previously said. Kate doesn't deny having had previously said that.
But you are right the actual words on the video were from Oprah.
And what happened to that blanket after that?
I was wondering that too. Could they have given it to the dog as a dog blanket. ?{)(**
It depends when the photos of the apartment were taken, because the blanket was in the photos. All I know is they were taken between 1am and 4am.
Pathetic
I think some seem to find the concept of giving a dog something to sniff then handing it straight back hard to grasp.I asked my friend who trained tracking hunting dogs and she thought the tracking team would hold onto the blanket to remind the dogs what they were looking for. I've no real expertise on this topic myself.
I asked my friend who trained tracking hunting dogs and she thought the tracking team would hold onto the blanket to remind the dogs what they were looking for. I've no real expertise on this topic myself.
But maybe they didn't keep it then you could be right.
The dog who sniffed the blanket wasn't really a tracking dog, he was primarily a patrol dog with 'some' training in tracking.It was a long shot using him and his handler may not have known or followed procedure. The tracking dog's handler did. He kept the towel he was given in a plastic bag to preserve the scent.
Perhaps this was it? Although why anyone would leave such a clue lying around in full view escapes me.
Former South African police superintendent Danie Krugel is haunted by the muddy pink and white child's blanket he found at the site in Praia da Luz in Portugal where he believes the body of Madeleine McCann is hidden.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id304.html
Was the blanket somehing like this, I wonder?
(http://resources.findmeagift.com/site_media/images/products/p_zoom/pmc1716_princess_blanket_wb_1800_1.jpg)
The Portuguese deployed air-scenting dogs.Are these words used in the reports?
They didn't deploy ground-scenting dogs.
Are these words used in the reports?
I tend to think you are wrong. They might not be fully trained but they were still capable of some ground tracking.
I asked my friend who trained tracking hunting dogs and she thought the tracking team would hold onto the blanket to remind the dogs what they were looking for. I've no real expertise on this topic myself.
But maybe they didn't keep it then you could be right.
Wasn't it put in a plastic bag so that it could be used to reinvigorate the dogs later on?
The Portuguese deployed air-scenting dogs.
They didn't deploy ground-scenting dogs.
I'm afraid the thread has moved on from your [dogmatic 8)-)))] claims ferryman. Perhaps you should read it? If you do and wish to repeat your claims you will need to provide evidence to support them, because the evidence already provided makes it clear that tracking dogs were brought from Lisbon.
I was unaware that it was four days travel from Lisbon to Luz.
In the interim ... the GNR dogs ... as described in the files and by Ferryman ... had to fill in the gaps as well as they and their handlers could.
I was unaware that it was four days travel from Lisbon to Luz.
In the interim ... the GNR dogs ... as described in the files and by Ferryman ... had to fill in the gaps as well as they and their handlers could.
Who told the S&R dog handlers that the item had been used for bathing rather than the specific use of a comfort blanket from Madeleine's bed?
KM certainly does not refer to a towel being provided to the GNR or the PJ in her statements or book.
Who told the S&R dog handlers that the item had been used for bathing rather than the specific use of a comfort blanket from Madeleine's bed?I think policemen are smart enough to see a towel when its given to them....even if described as a turkish towel...never heard of a turkish blanket myself
KM certainly does not refer to a towel being provided to the GNR or the PJ in her statements or book.
I think policemen are smart enough to see a towel when its given to them....even if described as a turkish towel...never heard of a turkish blanket myself
I agree. So the burning question is - who identified & removed a towel from the crime scene to give to the search & rescue dogs?Whoever GAVE it to them or told someone MM had been dried with it and then given....only a family member could know this, so NOT police or other bystanders
Whoever GAVE it to them or told someone MM had been dried with it and then given....only a family member could know this, so NOT police or other bystanders
There is no record of any such event.There is a record in the pj files of police being given a towel that the child had used
There is no record of any such event.But Goncalo mentions it so there must be some fact to it.
In fact, the GNR dogs are essentially trained for searching in a rural environment; in addition, the persistence of bodily odours diminishes after 48 hours.
We get them to sniff a towel which, according to Kate, was used to dry Madeleine after her bath. When the dogs finished going along block 5, when, logically, they should have been heading for block 4, they suddenly turn to the left. They then follow the path at the back that separates the apartments from the leisure area. They go quite a long way in that direction. Even if the reaction of the two dogs coincides, the trainers cannot draw any definite conclusions: in fact, it's already been more than two days since the disappearance. What they can state with certainty, is that Madeleine went along there, without being able to pinpoint the date. Gerald McCann confirms this claim: he took that same route with Madeleine a few days earlier.
It would help people to read the thread before commenting. All the evidence is there, with links. All the myths and misunderstandings have been examined and the whole story has been clarified.
4th May
02.30am GNR patrol dog from Portemao with some tracking training given MM's pink princess blanket by Kate.
11.30pm Two tracking dogs from Lisbon given turkish bath towel
All three dogs follow the same route; left from wooden door, down between blocks 4 and 5 to pathway, exit onto road, cross over to side of block 6, turn right to lampost at entrance to car park south of block 6. One dog goes to Tapas ebtrance, two don't. All the cites have been posted.
Madeleine slept with her blanket, it must have been saturated with her scent. Which is probably why the dog handlers chose it in preference to her clothing.
Why then would a damp towel which may have been used by others or even to dry the bath or the floor be chosen to replace the blanket? Seems decidedly odd.
Madeleine slept with her blanket, it must have been saturated with her scent. Which is probably why the dog handlers chose it in preference to her clothing.I think a towel would have picked up billions of skin cells as it is rubbed across Madeleine's skin, so I tend to think it would be a very good item for the tracker dogs are searching for skin cells on the ground.
Why then would a damp towel which may have been used by others or even to dry the bath or the floor be chosen to replace the blanket? Seems decidedly odd.
I think a towel would have picked up billions of skin cells as it is rubbed across Madeleine's skin, so I tend to think it would be a very good item for the tracker dogs are searching for skin cells on the ground.
I think a towel would have picked up billions of skin cells as it is rubbed across Madeleine's skin, so I tend to think it would be a very good item for the tracker dogs are searching for skin cells on the ground.
The largest fabric object with a maximum of her scent on it at the time would have been either the bedding or her blanket, I would have thought.Well Goncalo says it though.
A towel might have been as well, if for some reason there was a specific reason for the handlers to believe that a specific towel would have had primarily her scent on it.... but I can't find anything in the files to that effect.
We get them to sniff a towel which, according to Kate, was used to dry Madeleine after her bath.page #56 online version.
Undoubtedly.That was my original concern too. Maybe Kate or Gerry could determine that it was Madeleines to begin with.
But what provenance was there that those billions of skin cells on a towel were exclusive to Madeleine ... or even hers?
I don't see any confirmation that there were two distinct items provided to the dogs (as opposed to the same item being given a different label by search officers more concerned with having a large object with her scent on it).
.... After all, she was mistaken about when she gave them the blanket; she thought it was later than it actually was.Could you document that claim too please? Just so this thread becomes fully useful reference please. I don't doubt you.
The dogs were not supplied with anything (that would have been of any use to them in attempting to track Madeleine's scent; nor could they have been)!That seems a ridiculous claim. Back it up please.
That's they key point.
That seems a ridiculous claim. Back it up please.
I have done so countless times. Dogs pressed into service for tracking purposes came from a search-and-rescue core. Search and rescue work is the work of air-scenting dogs.I followed that up with some investigation and air scenting dogs can do tracking work as well. It is not hard and fast.
Mark Harrison said the Portuguese had deployed air-scenting dogs.
The GNR final report is at variance with the dog handlers' statements.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
On 7th May the same searches were continued, being extended to to the entire northern part of Almadena to the site of Espojeiro and the verges of the EN125 until the Boi valley.
At about 19.. the undersigned officer, accompanied by the Commander, Officer Silva, took part in a meetings with the PJ Directorate, being asked by the PJ about the viability of giving the girl's clothes to the dogs for the dogs to sniff again, and if by means of the odour inhaled, they would be able to mark an identical odour in one of the resort apartments even though its door was closed.
With regard to this task, Officer Silva referred to the fact that the time that had passed would be a crucial condition for the dogs' work in obtaining results and that the entirety of the human odours existing in the apartments and access paths could make the dogs' searches very difficult. However, in spite of not being a normal situation for tracking, it could be attempted, whilst the operation should be carried out as quickly as possible and not directed towards one but to all the apartments in the resort, it being appropriate for the handler not to know which apartment was chosen, so as not the be conditioned.
In this concrete situation, the objective would be for the dogs to carry out a discontinuous search, in other words, to sniff the girl's clothes and immediately search near to the apartments, checking to see if there was any change in the behaviour of the dogs.
At about 23.00 accompanied by a PJ inspector, the searches were begun. After Rex was given the girl's clothing to sniff, he began to search on the ground floor of block 5 and when he passed the door of apartment 5 A (the place the girl had disappeared from) according to his handler, officer Fernandes, the dog altered its behaviour, sniffing with greater intensity than he had done before. Apartment 5J of the same block was also checked as the dog had been more agitated than before as if there were a very strong strange odour there. It was stated that this apartment had been unoccupied for some time. Afterwards, the same kind of search was carried out using the dog Zarus which in general terms showed the same behaviour in the same places as Rex had done
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clothing allegedly used for scenting & no mention of following the same route as on the night of the 4th.
I have done so countless times. Dogs pressed into service for tracking purposes came from a search-and-rescue core. Search and rescue work is the work of air-scenting dogs.
Mark Harrison said the Portuguese had deployed air-scenting dogs.
I have done so countless times. Dogs pressed into service for tracking purposes came from a search-and-rescue core. Search and rescue work is the work of air-scenting dogs.
Mark Harrison said the Portuguese had deployed air-scenting dogs.
No attempt was made to track the child with the air scenting dogs from Lisbon;
After this, at about 08.00 the three search and rescue sniffer dog teams (Silva with Timmy, Cortez with Sacha and Sousa with Kolly and Cookie) who had arrived at the site, began searching, leaving the resort in the direction of the beach.
Then extra dogs arrived from Lisbon;
At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team).
After the officers had been updated about facts relating to the disappearance, they tried to reconstruct the route the girl might have taken with the two tracker dogs. For this purpose the dogs were given a blanket to sniff, provided by the parents, which had been used by Madeleine.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
It's quite clear that there is a difference between the dogs, and it was the two tracker dogs only who attempted to track the child.
I don't follow.The majority were rescue and recovery dogs but a small number were used as trackers (close in to the scene of the crime) - that's my understanding of it.
....
The searches were based on a strategy of searching in "rescue and recovery mode?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
What did the search and rescue team from Lisbon actually do ... if not participate in the search for Madeleine?
I don't follow.
**snip
On Saturday 21.07.2007 I met with Major Luis Seqeuira, GNR Portimao who was the search coordinator for all search activity that was under taken in the physical search for Madeleine McCann.
Major Seqeuira has not benefited from any formal training or accreditation in the management of searching for missing persons. The search officers with the exception of the search and rescue team dispatched from Lisbon had not benefited from any formal training in search procedures. The teams available and deployed by Major Seqeuira were drawn from unit of the GNR, Civil Protection, Fire Brigade, Red Cross and Urban Police. Each team numbered
around 10 and between 80 to 100 personnel were involved in search activity.
The searches were based on a strategy of searching in "rescue and recovery mode?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm
What did the search and rescue team from Lisbon actually do ... if not participate in the search for Madeleine?
It's perfectly clear. Lots of GNR officers joined the search but the only officers formally trained in search procedures were those from Lisbon.But because the scent trail fades rapidly with time a partially trained dog today would be better than a fully trained dog tomorrow. It is largely the dogs natural ability some are born with good noses and others don't.
None of the other GNR officers who searched had received formal training. Not even the coordinator, Major Luis Seqeuira.
Could you document that claim too please? Just so this thread becomes fully useful reference please. I don't doubt you.
I think I already did. Oh well, here it is again.The bit directly after the bit you quoted above might give us a clue:
In her book she says she handed over the blanket in the morning. She says she saw no dogs during the night, but the GNR patrol dog handler was given the blanket at 02.30am.
I don’t remember seeing any police dogs until the morning, and if there were any specific police searches overnight, they were not apparent. At some point in the first twenty-four hours (I could not say when exactly, but probably that morning) I recall one of the GNR patrol officers asking us for some of Madeleine’s clothing or belongings to enable these dogs to identify her scent. I fetched the pink princess blanket she took to bed with her every night, which they took, and some of her clothes, which they didn’t. [Madeleine]
After arriving at the GNR post with his colleagues Morais and two dogs (Numi and Kit), German Shepherd dogs, which made up the search team, they immediately left for P da L. They arrived at about 02.30.
When they arrived at the scene, they entered the McCann's apartment by the front door, and entered the living room, where there were some PJ officers as well as the MCCann couple. The just talked to some colleagues from the PJ and asked for a piece of clothing that Madeleine had worn or used recently. They were given a pink/orange blanket that the child had been covered with in her bed.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-LACAO.htm
He saw Kate again at 4pm and recognised her from earlier. Did he still have the dog with him? He doesni say;
He remembers that during a brief rest period at about 04.00, Madeleine's mother asked whether there was any news and whether the roads had been blocked off.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-LACAO.htm
I couldn’t see anyone about by this time, except for a couple of GNR police cars in the road outside and a handful of officers hanging around. None of them appeared to be doing very much. I couldn’t stand the thought of nothing happening while time marched inexorably onward. Madeleine could be miles away by now. At one point I went out to speak to the police, needing some reassurance. It was difficult and exasperating as communication was so limited, and there was no reassurance to be had. [Madeleine]
How exasperating it must have been; Portuguese people speaking Portuguese. No consideration at all. How Kate expected to see what was happening outside I don't know; she was indoors mostly.
I think I already did. Oh well, here it is again.Hi G-unit - do you think that explains your original statement " After all, she was mistaken about when she gave them the blanket; she thought it was later than it actually was"?
In her book she says she handed over the blanket in the morning. She says she saw no dogs during the night, but the GNR patrol dog handler was given the blanket at 02.30am.
I don’t remember seeing any police dogs until the morning, and if there were any specific police searches overnight, they were not apparent. At some point in the first twenty-four hours (I could not say when exactly, but probably that morning) I recall one of the GNR patrol officers asking us for some of Madeleine’s clothing or belongings to enable these dogs to identify her scent. I fetched the pink princess blanket she took to bed with her every night, which they took, and some of her clothes, which they didn’t. [Madeleine]
After arriving at the GNR post with his colleagues Morais and two dogs (Numi and Kit), German Shepherd dogs, which made up the search team, they immediately left for P da L. They arrived at about 02.30.
When they arrived at the scene, they entered the McCann's apartment by the front door, and entered the living room, where there were some PJ officers as well as the MCCann couple. The just talked to some colleagues from the PJ and asked for a piece of clothing that Madeleine had worn or used recently. They were given a pink/orange blanket that the child had been covered with in her bed.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-LACAO.htm
He saw Kate again at 4pm and recognised her from earlier. Did he still have the dog with him? He doesni say;
He remembers that during a brief rest period at about 04.00, Madeleine's mother asked whether there was any news and whether the roads had been blocked off.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-LACAO.htm
I couldn’t see anyone about by this time, except for a couple of GNR police cars in the road outside and a handful of officers hanging around. None of them appeared to be doing very much. I couldn’t stand the thought of nothing happening while time marched inexorably onward. Madeleine could be miles away by now. At one point I went out to speak to the police, needing some reassurance. It was difficult and exasperating as communication was so limited, and there was no reassurance to be had. [Madeleine]
How exasperating it must have been; Portuguese people speaking Portuguese. No consideration at all. How Kate expected to see what was happening outside I don't know; she was indoors mostly.
It's perfectly clear. Lots of GNR officers joined the search but the only officers formally trained in search procedures were those from Lisbon.
None of the other GNR officers who searched had received formal training. Not even the coordinator, Major Luis Seqeuira.
But because the scent trail fades rapidly with time a partially trained dog today would be better than a fully trained dog tomorrow. It is largely the dogs natural ability some are born with good noses and others don't.
Hi G-unit - do you think that explains your original statement " After all, she was mistaken about when she gave them the blanket; she thought it was later than it actually was"?
The bit directly after the bit you quoted above might give us a clue:
"I walked briskly up and down Rua Dr Agostinho da Silva, sometimes breaking into a jog, clinging to the hope that I'd spot something in the dark".
It's perfectly clear. Lots of GNR officers joined the search but the only officers formally trained in search procedures were those from Lisbon.Is there any such thing as a correct procedure for making a search for a missing child?
None of the other GNR officers who searched had received formal training. Not even the coordinator, Major Luis Seqeuira.
Do you know where that road is Alfie? Most of the searching took place further away, that bit was searched first.I am aware of that yes. And your point is...?
Undoubtedly.Hands up !
But what provenance was there that those billions of skin cells on a towel were exclusive to Madeleine ... or even hers?
Hands up !
When my kids were little, just 17 months apart, I used to dry them off with the same towel.
Maybe most people would be more fussy? Dunno ?
But if that towel was sitting on the bed, then it is quite possible that the sweaty lifter moved it or wiped his hands on it.
Even accidentally knocked it off the bed and walked over it? We just dont know.
Hands up !
When my kids were little, just 17 months apart, I used to dry them off with the same towel.
Maybe most people would be more fussy? Dunno ?
But if that towel was sitting on the bed, then it is quite possible that the sweaty lifter moved it or wiped his hands on it.
Even accidentally knocked it off the bed and walked over it? We just dont know.
I've been through the whole of the GNR reports and I have found one reference to 'tracker dogs':Well if they followed the earlier search doesn't that mean the tracker dogs were used twice at the least? I wonder if they recorded the apartments that were in this category "(apart from those not under her administration)"?
On 10th May at about 20.10, upon the request of the PJ, searches were carried out in all of the apartments belonging to blocks 4 and 5 of the OC, two tracker dogs and two search and rescue dogs being used for this operation, adopting the same methods as those used on 7th May, just that this time the apartments were all open and searched one by one, being accompanied by a representative from the resort, who had the keys to all the apartments (apart from those not under her administration) and also with the objective of helping with the searches.
Quite why you would bring in tracker-dogs, that late, to search the apartments, I'm not too sure ...
Well if they followed the earlier search doesn't that mean the tracker dogs were used twice at the least? I wonder if they recorded the apartments that were in this category "(apart from those not under her administration)"?
No mention in the report of use of tracker dogs before (that I can find).The only purpose of picking up the blanket and the towel was for tracking purposes. Search and rescue dogs don't need specific scent; they just find humans.
The only purpose of picking up the blanket and the towel was for tracking purposes. Search and rescue dogs don't need specific scent; they just find humans.
But read the report. The dogs they used were search and rescue dogs and that's why they had the debate (about whether it would be worth giving the dog anything to sniff), a redundant conversation if they used tracker-dogs.I've read that these dogs had some tracking training. It is fairly instinctive in some dogs. I'm sure we've cited this already.
(Tracker-dogs can't work any other way).
I've read that these dogs had some tracking training. It is fairly instinctive in some dogs. I'm sure we've cited this already.
So, Numi first had the blanket, then Rex had it at some point.
So what was Amaral on about?
"At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team)."
Tracking Team dogs were Rex and Zarus. They were given Madeleine's blanket to sniff and track.
"After the officers had been updated about facts relating to the disappearance, they tried to reconstruct the route the girl might have taken with the two tracker dogs. For this purpose the dogs were given a blanket to sniff, provided by the parents, which had been used by Madeleine."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
Rex had a towel, the blanket was never heard of again after it was given to Numi's handler Lacao. [Except in the report written six month's later, which contained errors]
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CARLOS-LACAO.htm
The emergency was to grab the most useful item to help search for her, which they did. One could argue that the blanket should have been bagged... but what else could they have used with her recent scent?
Whether they used just the blanket or the blanket, a towel and items of clothing doesn't unduly bother me.
What I find stranger is Amaral and Sargento's numerous insinuations about the blanket having disappeared in suspicious circumstances and used as a shroud...
I think the interesting point was the direction taken by all three dogs. That couldn't have been predicted."Predicted" is probably not the right word.
The first item given seems to have a clear connection with the child. The connection between the second item and the child is much less obvious.
Leaving out smelly lifters [whose existence and personal hygiene habits are speculation] it is, as you say, quite normal for more than one person to use a towel. Did each person bring their own towel which was used exclusively by them? We don't know.
It would probably have been a better idea for a clearly personal item to have been given. The clothes worn the previous day would have been ideal. It's a pity the police didn't ask for specific items rather than just taking what they were offered.
I have always wondered about that but most probably Kate put the clothes in the wash at bath time so that rendered them useless.
Why was a second item needed for the sniffer dogs anyway? I think the simple answer to that is that there were so many dogs operating at the same time in different areas that they needed more than one scent source to take out with them.
There were her shoes - they shouldn't have gone in the wash even if everything else had.
I have always wondered about that but most probably Kate put the clothes in the wash at bath time so that rendered them useless.
Why was a second item needed for the sniffer dogs anyway? I think the simple answer to that is that there were so many dogs operating at the same time in different areas that they needed more than one scent source to take out with them.
Good point jassi. 8((()*/
Having read through most of this thread today I am of the opinion that the dogs were actually following Kates scent since she also handled both items. This would account for the dogs tracking upstairs.
It may well be. She is bound to have handled the towel when drying Madeleine, if nothing else.
Did she take that into account when proffering the towel?
That was the PATROL dog used at 02.30am on 4th May. [cite already given]There are question whether 5C was checked. If the room was being cleaned by OC staff it sounds like they would have had access to it so this sentence would apply "The two TRACKER dogs, Rex and Zarus, arrived at 11pm on 4th May from Lisbon with their handler Officer Fernandes. They immediately used the dogs who were given the towel and who both went down the path etc. They were used again on 8th inside the two blocks, with the same item, and again on 10th when all apartments to which OC had keys were opened".
The two TRACKER dogs, Rex and Zarus, arrived at 11pm on 4th May from Lisbon with their handler Officer Fernandes. They immediately used the dogs who were given the towel and who both went down the path etc. They were used again on 8th inside the two blocks, with the same item, and again on 10th when all apartments to which OC had keys were opened. The discussion on 7th or 8th May with the PJ was about the likelihood of them being able to track given the time which had passed.
At about 19.. the undersigned officer, accompanied by the Commander, Officer Silva, took part in a meetings with the PJ Directorate, being asked by the PJ about the viability of giving the girl's clothes to the dogs for the dogs to sniff again, and if by means of the odour inhaled, they would be able to mark an identical odour in one of the resort apartments even though its door was closed.
With regard to this task, Officer Silva referred to the fact that the time that had passed would be a crucial condition for the dogs' work in obtaining results and that the entirety of the human odours existing in the apartments and access paths could make the dogs' searches very difficult. However, in spite of not being a normal situation for tracking, it could be attempted, whilst the operation should be carried out as quickly as possible and not directed towards one but to all the apartments in the resort, it being appropriate for the handler not to know which apartment was chosen, so as not the be conditioned.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
How many more pages are required to analyse a very simple situation? StreuthHow is it simple?
How is it simple?how many, what type, which were brought in and where was used in conjunction with searches a acccording to their training...you know basic facts...its all in the files, so no idea why people are arguing about it
how many, what type, which were brought in and where was used in conjunction with searches a acccording to their training...you know basic facts...its all in the files, so no idea why people are arguing about itThat is what we have been trying to do except we find there are errors in the summary compared to the individual reports from the dog handlers themselves.
That is what we have been trying to do except we find there are errors in the summary compared to the individual reports from the dog handlers themselves.You still dont need 35 pages to type the basics
You still dont need 35 pages to type the basicsEach post adds to the length e.g. you saying "You still don't need 35 pages to type the basics" and my reply is another 14% of another page.
Each post adds to the length e.g. you saying "You still don't need 35 pages to type the basics" and my reply is another 14% of another page.
How is it simple?
My point misty was more about arguments onhere whether tracker dogs were used, ferryman insists they were not, files say otherwise, dint they? Its that simple little detail.....
I don't know why you doubt the words of Harrison, as previously quoted by Ferryman. Harrison was involved in the training of Keela so I guess he knew the right questions to ask the PJ/GNR about the capabilities & training of the S&R dogs used.
I dont doubt harrison oer se
So are you asserting NO tracker dogs were used? Are you?
It's like Ferryman said......air scenting, not ground-scenting. Generic not specific scent training.
It's like Ferryman said......air scenting, not ground-scenting. Generic not specific scent training.Harrison drew up some enormous reports which could have missed finer detail like the two trackers dogs in amongst all the air scenting dogs. If he thought all this extensive work had been done further afield he should have at least recommended all apartment searches with tracker dogs.
So no reason to ask for articles to follow specific scent, why were they asked for?????
You still dont need 35 pages to type the basics
It's like Ferryman said......air scenting, not ground-scenting. Generic not specific scent training.
Because they were better at scenting than the GNR patrol dogs.As I understand it air scenting dogs would be not that useful in areas where there are people all around them. They need tracking dogs for work close to the OC. Some of the air scenting dogs had tracking ability so items were collected, a blanket and a towel and used. The tracks were in and around the building and across to the car park across the road and possibly to the reception building as well.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
*snipped*
6. At 00.40, given the complexity of the situation that seemed to surround the disappearance, the GNR post commander requested reinforcements from two sniffer dog teams from the Portimao territorial group to help in the searches, considering the possibility that the girl could have left the apartment on foot and could be somewhere not very far from the OC resort.
7. At 01.00 after the group commander had been briefed about the situation, telephone contact was made with an official from the Queluz GNR school, with the aim of their releasing search and rescue dog teams, seeing as these are specially trained to find missing persons, which is not the case with the Portimao sniffer dogs, which are essentially patrol dogs.
May I suggest you read the thread where the evidence appears repeatedly instead of accepting and repeating ferryman's misunderstanding?
Only the tracker dogs were given an item to sniff, not the other S and R dogs.
Some S and R dogs arrived from Lisbon at 8am. They sniffed nothing.
It was the two tracker dogs who sniffed the towel. They arrived at 11pm on 4th, with their handler Fernandes, the only one who handled two dogs.
Service Information 9 May 2007How do you define "air scenting dogs", because what you have described is the work of ground scenting dogs.
To Dr G Amaral
From Vitor Matos, Chief Inspector
Search by GNR dog team
- As you know, yesterday, 8 May 2007 at 23h45, the undersigned joined a search effected by the GNR dog team which targeted Blocks 5 and 4 of the Ocean Club resort and adjacent areas, with the objective of trying to reconstruct the possible route taken by the missing child on 3 May 2007.
- The search was led by GNR 1st Sergeant A.F.Silva, head of the search and rescue team who coordinated all the work done by the "dual track" [method] which was performed by two tracker dogs with their handler, GNR officer P.Fernandes.
- The members of the GNR advised that the tracker dogs are trained to search mainly in rural areas, given the fact that the best capability of the animal is to identify a different and strong smell in a wide, open area, it being sure that in terms of timing they said that after 48 hours from the event it is difficult to obtain positive results. Concerning urban areas, or areas with identical characteristics, they advised that due to the fact of there being a large number of odours in the air, it becomes impossible for the tracker dog to manage to identify/locate the "target smell", because it is diffuse [dispersed; broken up], [the dog] ending up becoming confused and indicating its disinterest in continuing the search........snipped.
How much more proof do people need that these were air scenting dogs?
How do you define "air scenting dogs", because what you have described is the work of ground scenting dogs.
OK it says "odours in the air" but there is air between the ground and the dogs nose (there is always the need for air) whether they are air scenting dogs or ground scenting dogs.
How do you define "air scenting dogs", because what you have described is the work of ground scenting dogs.
OK it says "odours in the air" but there is air between the ground and the dogs nose (there is always the need for air) whether they are air scenting dogs or ground scenting dogs.
An air-scenting dog is trying to locate & track a specific scent through the air (see Eddie trying to locate cadaver scent on the videos.http://www.vsrda.org/about-vsrda/using-air-scent-dogs
A ground-tracking dog works with its nose to the ground, working from the odour of deposited skin cells & trying to locate their track on the ground.
ETA I do hope you're not just extracting the proverbial................
I believe what Harrison said in his report.
Please provide a cite from the Portuguese dog handlers that their dogs were ground-scenting trackers as opposed to air-scenting search & rescue.
What I am trying to understand is what difference this makes, they didn't find her?
Family members SHOULD NOT handle belongings owned by the lost person. Once they do, the items are contaminated and cannot be used by a trailing dog.
http://www.ussartf.org/dogs_search_rescue.htm(http://www.vsar.org/NASAR%20group.jpg)scent article - This is any article touched only by the subject that can be used by the tracking or training dog to gain the scent of the subject. Gathering the scent article is done with care so no other scent is present to confuse the dog. Preferably this article is one of clothing and is gathered with tongs or a stick, then placed in a paper or plastic bag. The dog then is offered the scent article, still in the bag or emptied onto the ground, to gain the subjects scent The dog is then given the command to start the search.
http://www.vsar.org/vocab.html#scentarticle
From what I have read in the files the above procedures are not mentioned; if they were not carried out, it seems the work of the dogs used, whatever their speciality may have been would have been compromised if not made entirely irrelevant.
It was a long shot - the handlers said as much - but one well worth taking in my opinion when trying to locate a missing child. It could have worked against the odds. Maybe one day we will discover whether or not Madeleine was taken to a car in the car park opposite the tapas.
At the time the only concrete evidence was an eye witness account ... pity that wasn't investigated more assiduously.
What I am trying to understand is what difference this makes, they didn't find her?
Madeleine was barefooted when she went missing. A ground-scenting dog, given the correct scenting item, stood a much better chance of tracking her if she'd wandered, don't you think?
I think that's the crucial bit. What scent were the dogs actually following?
If they had used her shoes, there should have been no doubt.
It might be possible to get an uncontaminated item of clothing from an adult, but children are dressed and undressed by others, so all their clothing is contaminated. The tracker dog handler did his best with the item he was given and used a plastic bag.
The eye witness account of a man carrying a child has been almost certainly ruled out by SY, just as it was by the PJ. Not for the same reasons as far as we know, but the PJ managed to reach the correct conclusion nevertheless.
At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team).
With regard to this task, Officer Silva referred to the fact that the time that had passed would be a crucial condition for the dogs' work in obtaining results and that the entirety of the human odours existing in the apartments and access paths could make the dogs' searches very difficult. However, in spite of not being a normal situation for tracking, it could be attempted, whilst the operation should be carried out as quickly as possible and not directed towards one but to all the apartments in the resort, it being appropriate for the handler not to know which apartment was chosen, so as not the be conditioned.
Brietta, Misty and others are doing a sterling job, here, in establishing that the Portuguese deployed air-scenting dogs, including (as above) that other family-members (of the person searched for should not touch items used for scent-article purposes).
And yet, and yet, it is (after all!) just possible that G-Unit may have a point.
Here is what G-Unit rests his/her case on (that the Portuguese had ground-tracking dogs).
And in the light of the research Brietta, Misty and others have done (I suggest) this comment takes on a whole different perspective:
I (reluctantly) concede that G-Unit may (after all) have a point.
The abnormality of the situation (for tracking purposes) being precisely what Brietta and Misty have highlighted.
I think the most important sentence from that is " ... whilst the operation should be carried out as quickly as possible and not directed towards one but to all the apartments in the resort, it being appropriate for the handler not to know which apartment was chosen, so as not the be conditioned."
Which illustrates the total professionalism of the Portuguese handlers who seem to have had complete understanding of and no problem with acknowledging the possibility for dogs to be influenced subconsciously by the handler.
By the time they were Madeleine's age my children were dressing and undressing themselves, the only problem for them being shoe laces.
In my opinion the cite I used demands almost clinical conditions for a scent source which must be almost impossible to achieve under normal circumstances.
I think the most logical scent source for the dogs was Madeleine's blanket with other contaminating scents being overridden by the strongest, which must have been hers.
The witness sighting was discarded without further investigation when it was found that it did not fit the senior investigator's then working hypothesis. The information used by Scotland Yard to "almost certainly" rule it out was available to that investigation in 2007.
The fact that it was at a remove of seven years that a foreign force "managed to reach the correct conclusion" using information available to the original investigators is a measure of the incompetence which evidences their neglect of elementary procedure.
Brietta, Misty and others are doing a sterling job, here, in establishing that the Portuguese deployed air-scenting dogs, including (as above) that other family-members (of the person searched for should not touch items used for scent-article purposes).
And yet, and yet, it is (after all!) just possible that G-Unit may have a point.
Here is what G-Unit rests his/her case on (that the Portuguese had ground-tracking dogs).
And in the light of the research Brietta, Misty and others have done (I suggest) this comment takes on a whole different perspective:
I (reluctantly) concede that G-Unit may (after all) have a point.
The abnormality of the situation (for tracking purposes) being precisely what Brietta and Misty have highlighted.
The blanket was indeed the best source, but it wasn't offered to the best qualified dog, for unknown reasons. Nevertheless the towel provided produced the same result. That suggests;
The child's scent was on both items
Someone else's scent was on both items
There were different scents on the items, but both came from people who followed that route together or separately.
Jane Tanner's evidence was not highly regarded by the PJ, but not for the reasons you give. Do you have evidence that information used by SY was available to the PJ in 2007?
Brietta, Misty and others are doing a sterling job, here, in establishing that the Portuguese deployed air-scenting dogs, including (as above) that other family-members (of the person searched for should not touch items used for scent-article purposes).
And yet, and yet, it is (after all!) just possible that G-Unit may have a point.
Here is what G-Unit rests his/her case on (that the Portuguese had ground-tracking dogs).
And in the light of the research Brietta, Misty and others have done (I suggest) this comment takes on a whole different perspective:
I (reluctantly) concede that G-Unit may (after all) have a point.
The abnormality of the situation (for tracking purposes) being precisely what Brietta and Misty have highlighted.
If only springs to mind If only they had done full searches in the neighbouring apartments the next day! Instead of all this dog searching miles around the village. It doesn't make sense to me that Madeleine would have walked for miles through the countryside.
By the time they were Madeleine's age my children were dressing and undressing themselves, the only problem for them being shoe laces.I think to support this you would need to come up with several things. Whether there actually was a crèche record, overlooked by Amaral AND Rebelo. Why crècheman was going the wrong way. Why crècheman did not come forward. Whether crècheman really is Tannerman. And whether Tannerman's description mutated, as is alleged.
In my opinion the cite I used demands almost clinical conditions for a scent source which must be almost impossible to achieve under normal circumstances.
I think the most logical scent source for the dogs was Madeleine's blanket with other contaminating scents being overridden by the strongest, which must have been hers.
The witness sighting was discarded without further investigation when it was found that it did not fit the senior investigator's then working hypothesis. The information used by Scotland Yard to "almost certainly" rule it out was available to that investigation in 2007.
The fact that it was at a remove of seven years that a foreign force "managed to reach the correct conclusion" using information available to the original investigators is a measure of the incompetence which evidences their neglect of elementary procedure.
I think to support this you would need to come up with several things. Whether there actually was a crèche record, overlooked by Amaral AND Rebelo. Why crècheman was going the wrong way. Why crècheman did not come forward. Whether crècheman really is Tannerman. And whether Tannerman's description mutated, as is alleged.
An interesting article here.
https://www.policeone.com/police-products/k9/k9-training/articles/6432355-Trailing-versus-tracking-The-keys-to-success/
I think to support this you would need to come up with several things. Whether there actually was a crèche record, overlooked by Amaral AND Rebelo. Why crècheman was going the wrong way. Why crècheman did not come forward. Whether crècheman really is Tannerman. And whether Tannerman's description mutated, as is alleged.
Madeleine was barefooted when she went missing. A ground-scenting dog, given the correct scenting item, stood a much better chance of tracking her if she'd wandered, don't you think?
I have seen nothing to suggest that Jane Tanner's description 'mutated' nor have I seen anything which suggests she said she saw Murat ... quite the contrary.
If crècheman is Tannerman ... it seems obvious to me that the Portuguese investigators were remiss in not either eliminating or discovering that fact ... particularly as they were so much closer to the time of the event than were Scotland Yard.
I'm aware that the day crèche records aren't always complete, but I find the idea that no evening ones existed a little odd.so
The PJ did manage to recuperate the day ones, but there is no record that I can find of even having asked for the evening ones. Perhaps they did and they got lost under the mountain of documents. Or perhaps no one thought to ask. If they had requested the evening ones and none existed, wouldn't that have been at least recorded as a note in the files?
so
They got the records relating to the McCann children. They never attended the night creche.
If the scent belonged to Madeleine, the dogs would have shown interest at the side gate (and that led to an enclosed area where scent would have lingered). They didn't.
They emerged from the passage and immediately crossed over to the side of block 6. We don't know if MM ever crossed there. The only person who says he crossed there was her father to speak to Jez Wilkins.
The dogs turned left at the end of the alleyway, back towards the apartment 5A & towards the main road. Then they crossed over. It depends if you believe the handler's statement or the little diagram as to where the dogs really did go. Either way, GM had been up the rear steps also (more recently than Madeleine) yet the dogs showed no interest at the gate.
Yep, but that was higher up the road.
They emerged from the passage and immediately crossed over to the side of block 6. We don't know if MM ever crossed there. The only person who says he crossed there was her father to speak to Jez Wilkins.
As a result of the investigations that have been made by own account after he was removed from the case, Gonçalo Amaral does not dismiss the possibility that the said blanket was used as a funeral blanket in a secret funerary ceremony made in the church of Luz, sustaining that illation in depositions from sources that he believes to be credible, between them, the one of Father José Manuel Pacheco from the Luz chapel.illation
So, has everyone agreed here? The tracker dogs used were ground scenting scent driven ones? Yeah or ney?
Its always nice to close a thread in agreement so it doesnt rise its ugly medusa head once again in the bloody future with the same shit spouted ad infinitum
Shouldnt there be a rule here because the mob here rule, that certain questions are answered or not? Ie how do you STOP groundhog disasters
That goes for most threads
Im sure other parts of the forum dont suffer from this rubbish
So, has everyone agreed here? The tracker dogs used were ground scenting scent driven ones? Yeah or ney?
Its always nice to close a thread in agreement so it doesnt rise its ugly medusa head once again in the bloody future with the same shit spouted ad infinitum
Shouldnt there be a rule here because the mob here rule, that certain questions are answered or not? Ie how do you STOP groundhog disasters
That goes for most threads
Im sure other parts of the forum dont suffer from this rubbish
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/INFORMATION-SERVICE.htm
Service Information 9 May 2007
To Dr G Amaral
From Vitor Matos, Chief Inspector
Search by GNR dog team
- As you know, yesterday, 8 May 2007 at 23h45, the undersigned joined a search effected by the GNR dog team which targeted Blocks 5 and 4 of the Ocean Club resort and adjacent areas, with the objective of trying to reconstruct the possible route taken by the missing child on 3 May 2007.
- The search was led by GNR 1st Sergeant A.F.Silva, head of the search and rescue team who coordinated all the work done by the "dual track" [method] which was performed by two tracker dogs with their handler, GNR officer P.Fernandes.
- The members of the GNR advised that the tracker dogs are trained to search mainly in rural areas, given the fact that the best capability of the animal is to identify a different and strong smell in a wide, open area, it being sure that in terms of timing they said that after 48 hours from the event it is difficult to obtain positive results. Concerning urban areas, or areas with identical characteristics, they advised that due to the fact of there being a large number of odours in the air, it becomes impossible for the tracker dog to manage to identify/locate the "target smell", because it is diffuse [dispersed; broken up], [the dog] ending up becoming confused and indicating its disinterest in continuing the search........snipped.
How much more proof do people need that these were air scenting dogs?
......It is only due to the uncertainty e.g. "a towel supposedly used to dry her" and the uncertainty that Madeleine would have been the only person touching that towel.
There must be a reason why people wish to deny that the two tracker dogs followed Madeleine's scent. They followed the scent on a towel supposedly used to dry her. The first dog to follow the same route, at 2.30am on 4th smelled at her blanket.
It is only due to the uncertainty e.g. "a towel supposedly used to dry her" and the uncertainty that Madeleine would have been the only person touching that towel.
That is a valid debating point, the fact that there were tracking dogs deployed isn't.True I read it as tracking dogs were deployed, but it was a difficult task due to the time that had lapsed.
True I read it as tracking dogs were deployed, but it was a difficult task due to the time that had lapsed.
Agreed, and in a human scent rich environment.And then to follow that with whatever track they discover, and the parents say well "I took that path with Madeleine earlier", one is none the wiser. If Madeleine had run around apartment 5 earlier we will never know if the tracker dogs were tracking this or her "final passage" around the building being carried by an abductor, or walking it again.
And then to follow that with whatever track they discover, and the parents say well "I took that path with Madeleine earlier", one is none the wiser. If Madeleine had run around apartment 5 earlier we will never know if the tracker dogs were tracking this or her "final passage" around the building being carried by an abductor, or walking it again.
It would only come into its own if the tracking dogs took their handlers on a path that Madeleine was unlikely to have taken previously.
It doesn't make sense that the S&R dogs were tracking scent from a known route a few days earlier but failed to pick up scent going up the back steps. Perhaps if trailing dogs had been used.................But if there had been a hit and run car accident (minor injury) and the perpetrator picked up the child for whatever purpose the scent trail could end at the lamp post in the carpark.
But if there had been a hit and run car accident (minor injury) and the perpetrator picked up the child for whatever purpose the scent trail could end at the lamp post in the carpark.
If she'd climbed out the window, walked around the building, been knocked over & removed from the scene by the driver, then it's a possibility. Still doesn't explain why the dogs weren't interested in the rear gate/steps, though.I could imagine this scenario:
I could imagine this scenario:
If they were interested the handlers would take their dogs away from there thinking "well obviously her scent will be near this gate" so it never featured in their report.
The Portuguese dogs were trained in different techniques which included ground and air scenting.Thank you
And then to follow that with whatever track they discover, and the parents say well "I took that path with Madeleine earlier", one is none the wiser. If Madeleine had run around apartment 5 earlier we will never know if the tracker dogs were tracking this or her "final passage" around the building being carried by an abductor.
It would only come into its own if the tracking dogs took their handlers on a path that Madeleine was unlikely to have taken previously.
Thank you
But misty and ferryman still have a problem whch might be answered by them considering why would a non tracking dogs handlers ask for a personal item
The explanation by her father was forthcoming after the dogs followed that route. Her mother, as far as I know, has never mentioned the tracking at all except to imply the blanket was handed over later than it was. Perhaps she wasn't there when the children ran away? Gerry doesn't exactly say, he just says 'they';
That, between Monday and Wednesday, not knowing the precise date, when they left the residence by the main door, to place the children in the respective creches, MADELEINE left [went] running to the left to the extreme opposite of the residential blocks where they were lodged, playing with the twins. That they had gone down to the furthest point away from those blocks, not knowing exactly how, the three children got into the gardens at the rear [of the blocks]. Then they followed the inside corridor [pathway] at the rear, next to the hedges [fences] up to the street that led to the secondary reception.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm
On all three days MM was delivered to creche in the mornings by her father, as were the twins. This makes sense as Kate had an early tennis lesson.
It could have been that Kate left first in the mornings to play tennis so she wasn't there when the children ran away.
In simple terms - you stick a dog in a field, you give it an item of clothing to scent then you ask the dog to find the source of the scent. That's called air-scenting/tracking.
A trailing dog works with its nose to the ground following a specific scent.
You are having a laugh
Do you ever read any of the links I post?
I do but I also read other links which betray yours
I dont do it for laughs
Post #557.It doesnt matter what articles yiu find, what matters is that the the police asked for a oersonal adticle and if their dogs were not trained to follow individual scent they wiuldnt have bothered
I don't spend a lot of time researching stuff for laughs either.
It doesnt matter what articles yiu find, what matters is that the the police asked for a oersonal adticle and if their dogs were not trained to follow individual scent they wiuldnt have botheredAll I can say is - no wonder they couldn't find Joana Cipriano if they had no proper trailing dogs.
All I can say is - no wonder they couldn't find Joana Cipriano if they had no proper trailing dogs.
All I can say is - no wonder they couldn't find Joana Cipriano if they had no proper trailing dogs.
I don't know much about that case. Did they bring in the tracker dogs from Lisbon? [the 'proper' trailing dogs]
TBH I don't know. I can't see any reference at all to dogs being used in the search for Joana, so it's not to say they weren't. Carana will probably know.
It doesnt matter what articles yiu find, what matters is that the the police asked for a oersonal adticle and if their dogs were not trained to follow individual scent they wiuldnt have botheredThey might not be fully trained , but better than nothing.
So why bring it up? If it wasnt JUST ANOTHER DIG at the pjs actions in thr MM case
I was going to ask that. Why mention something if you don't know what was done? To suggest it might be relevant? Then to be unable to say if it's relevant or not? How strange.
I was going to ask that. Why mention something if you don't know what was done? To suggest it might be relevant? Then to be unable to say if it's relevant or not? How strange.
It is relevant insofar as the Portuguese don't have the same resources to call upon as the UK when a child goes missing. It is such a rare event there, after all, so rare that the co-ordinator of the investigation had only dealt with 2 previous cases. Or maybe they just didn't know the correct type of dog to request attend from the specialist team.
I don't know how many times I have to post the evidence, but here goes again. They knew exactly which dogs they needed;I have boldened the time because I wonder if some readers who skim read (there is such a lot of new stuff daily) might have missed that it was 23.00 hours on the 4th, not the 3rd that these dogs arrived
At 01.00 [on 4th] after the group commander had been briefed about the situation, telephone contact was made with an official from the Queluz GNR school, with the aim of their releasing search and rescue dog teams, seeing as these are specially trained to find missing persons, which is not the case with the Portimao sniffer dogs, which are essentially patrol dogs.
These dogs came.
Sargeant Silva - Dog: Timmy
Officer Cortez - Dog: Sacha
Officer Sousa - Dog: Kolly/Cookie
Officer Rosa - Dog: Oscar
Officer Martins - Dog: Fusco
Officer Fernandes - Dog: Rex/ Zarus
At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team).
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
I have boldened the time because I wonder if some readers who skim read (there is such a lot of new stuff daily) might have missed that it was 23.00 hours on the 4th, not the 3rd that these dogs arrived
Thanks, Sadie. The first Queluz/Lisbon dogs arrived at 8am on 4th;
After this, at about 08.00 the three search and rescue sniffer dog teams (Silva with Timmy, Cortez with Sacha and Sousa with Kolly and Cookie) who had arrived at the site, began searching, leaving the resort in the direction of the beach.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
They, being air scenting dogs, didn't sniff anything belonging to MBM, they headed straight off to search. It was the reinforcements requested which included the two tracker dogs, Rex and Zarus. They arrived later, as you say, at 11pm on 4th and were given the towel.
So now you're saying the first team of S&R dogs was sent out without scenting an item. What, exactly, were they expected to find without a scent to locate?Wouldn't they just be tasked to find any human ahead of them regardless of the scent.
Wouldn't they just be tasked to find any human ahead of them regardless of the scent.
That might be a possibility in a wilderness into which no-one but the missing person had ventured. In an urban environment, particularly one where many people had been walking about dropping skin cells and sweat ... how could any dog be expected to know whose scent to follow and whose to ignore?i'm not sure, but that was why I thought they would do the searches in the populated areas in the evening and overnight when there should be few people about.
In simple terms - you stick a dog in a field, you give it an item of clothing to scent then you ask the dog to find the source of the scent. That's called air-scenting/tracking.
A trailing dog works with its nose to the ground following a specific scent.
i'm not sure, but that was why I thought they would do the searches in the populated areas in the evening and overnight when there should be few people about.
Fewer people might have been about but the odours left by all who had passed that way previously would be evident to the dogs. How would they know which scent would be of interest to their handlers?If you were to find every person within a zone the dogs don't need to know who you are looking for. In the end the handlers will do the assessment - is the person found a 4 year old girl? If not keep looking.
So now you're saying the first team of S&R dogs was sent out without scenting an item. What, exactly, were they expected to find without a scent to locate?
That might be a possibility in a wilderness into which no-one but the missing person had ventured. In an urban environment, particularly one where many people had been walking about dropping skin cells and sweat ... how could any dog be expected to know whose scent to follow and whose to ignore?
There were many areas within and around PdL full of rough brush type vegetation, bushes, etc where it would be easy to miss a child. These S & R dogs were used in those areas, on the beach and so forth. Look at the terrain leading to the Boavista golf club, foe example.
All I can say is - no wonder they couldn't find Joana Cipriano if they had no proper trailing dogs.Touchee, misty 8((()*/
Which is well within the training parameters and capabilities of search and rescue canines. That or the areas they efficiently searched are not subject to any dispute whatsoever. Undoubtedly, had Madeleine been there to be found these dogs had the capability to find her.I was thinking if they came across an occupied farm building they could give the dogs the clothing to sniff and let the dogs move around the building to see if there is any interest. Principally they must have been looking for a deceased child hidden somewhere in the countryside. I suppose if they thought the parents and friends could be involved in the disposal of the body, and they were out "searching" until 4 AM they would need to check an area within a 1-2 hour walk away from OC.