Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Redblossom on May 23, 2013, 09:04:28 PM
Title: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Redblossom on May 23, 2013, 09:04:28 PM
John Barrett, a former Scotland Yard dog handler, also indicated that the trained dogs used in an attempt to detect a "death smell" on Mrs McCann's Bible and clothes were brought in too long after Madeleine vanished. The crucial scent lasts for no longer than a month, he said.
Quoted in many newspaper articles
Kate Mccann says something similar in her book, if anyone has the quote, please do post, I have it on kindle but cannot copy and paste from it, its something about the scent of death believed to be constituted by putrescine and one other chemical, only this is just not true
Who is this John Barrett? Was he a cadaver dog handler? If what he alledgedly said is true, why would the police bother three months later? Wasting time money and energy? >@@(*&)
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: icabodcrane on May 23, 2013, 10:10:55 PM
Yes, John Barrett's expertise was certainly quoted extensively in the press wasn't it ?
Strange really, given that he retired from dog handling in the East End of London over 30 years ago
... not exactly an expert on modern day forensics then ?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 23, 2013, 10:16:22 PM
Here is what you were looking for, Redblossom : When researching the validity of sniffer-dog evidence later that month, Gerry would discover that false alerts can be attributable to the conscious or unconscious signals of the handler...... They had no proof that Madeleine was dead. All they actually had was the signal of a dog trying to please its instructor in an apartment from which Madeleine had been taken three months earlier. As we now know, the chemicals believed to create the ‘odour of death’, putrescence and cadaverine, last no longer than thirty days. There were no decaying body parts for the dog to find. It was simply wrong. Mr and Mrs McCann didn't read much about dogs, it seems... and obviously didn't know (do they now ?) what an EVRD is.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Redblossom on May 23, 2013, 10:23:04 PM
Here is what you were looking for, Redblossom : When researching the validity of sniffer-dog evidence later that month, Gerry would discover that false alerts can be attributable to the conscious or unconscious signals of the handler...... They had no proof that Madeleine was dead. All they actually had was the signal of a dog trying to please its instructor in an apartment from which Madeleine had been taken three months earlier. As we now know, the chemicals believed to create the ‘odour of death’, putrescence and cadaverine, last no longer than thirty days. There were no decaying body parts for the dog to find. It was simply wrong. Mr and Mrs McCann didn't read much about dogs, it seems... and obviously didn't know (do they now ?) what an EVRD is.
Thank you Anne!
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: south of the river on May 24, 2013, 09:15:36 AM
If Madeleine had died in an accident that evening then the amount of time for a cadaver scent to develop would have been very tight - experts say any where from 3 hours + for the body to start to release a scent that cant be classified as cadaver
But again it doesn't really matter as the PJ did not find any forensics that would help them. Nothing - this is what came out so loud in the files I have read - they were so sure that the dogs would find the smoking gun.
Again the alerting in the hire car to me signifies a big red flag to the accuracy to the dogs giving 100% positive alerts, I can accept that in a panic the parents might have hidden the body - though where always leaves me - but to then transfer a dead body a month plus later ? Bearing in mind that the " hiding " place must have been fairly close by going by the timelines and witness statements. I know that this is going over old ground but it still remains the crux of the argument, If you give the the motive as a given - then I have never yet seen a logical method and means
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 24, 2013, 09:28:12 AM
How is anyone supposed to have been familiar with the term EVRD? Grime developed the training technique himself, it was HIS own classification.
Martin Grime: I have developed the training of the E.V.R.D. ....
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business, had failed to keep up the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) licence that certified Eddie as a police 'cadaver dog'. Grime did have a second sniffer dog, Keela, but its licence expired a fortnight after they arrived in Jersey.
ACPO rules governing UK police dogs state: 'Dog and handler teams that fail to remain in-licence are deemed "not competent".' Grime admitted to The Mail on Sunday that the dog's licence had lapsed. He said: 'After I retired, my dogs were tested according to my own standards which are more stringent than ACPO's.
ETA So, we have only Mr. Grime to rely on with regard to the accuracy of the dogs, no independent authority. And Mr. Grime, as an independent consultant, effectively says: My dogs are excellent, because I say so.....
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Carana on May 24, 2013, 09:39:49 AM
John Barrett, a former Scotland Yard dog handler, also indicated that the trained dogs used in an attempt to detect a "death smell" on Mrs McCann's Bible and clothes were brought in too long after Madeleine vanished. The crucial scent lasts for no longer than a month, he said.
Quoted in many newspaper articles
Kate Mccann says something similar in her book, if anyone has the quote, please do post, I have it on kindle but cannot copy and paste from it, its something about the scent of death believed to be constituted by putrescine and one other chemical, only this is just not true
Who is this John Barrett? Was he a cadaver dog handler? If what he alledgedly said is true, why would the police bother three months later? Wasting time money and energy? >@@(*&)
On the Bible (sic) and clothes, i.e. cross-contamination.
I don't think bringing to the dogs over was a total waste as they might have found human remains.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: ferryman on May 24, 2013, 09:41:49 AM
...and obviously didn't know (do they now ?) what an EVRD is.
Was.
To be clear, the category "E"VRD was created with Eddie and ceased to exist when Eddie hung up his paws.
No other dog in the history of sniffer dogs ever owned the title.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 24, 2013, 09:53:15 AM
John Barrett, a former Scotland Yard dog handler, also indicated that the trained dogs used in an attempt to detect a "death smell" on Mrs McCann's Bible and clothes were brought in too long after Madeleine vanished. The crucial scent lasts for no longer than a month, he said.
Quoted in many newspaper articles
Kate Mccann says something similar in her book, if anyone has the quote, please do post, I have it on kindle but cannot copy and paste from it, its something about the scent of death believed to be constituted by putrescine and one other chemical, only this is just not true
Who is this John Barrett? Was he a cadaver dog handler? If what he alledgedly said is true, why would the police bother three months later? Wasting time money and energy? >@@(*&)
On the Bible (sic) and clothes, i.e. cross-contamination.
I don't think bringing to the dogs over was a total waste as they might have found human remains.
Yes, I would agree with that.
In fact I would go further. If the dogs had been deployed in a conventional manner, it's possible that the McCanns might never have been made arguidos.
Slight hostage to fortune there, because you can't rule out that Amaral would have concocted another excuse.
Or kept the talons clutched on Robert Murat.
Which would have been equally unsatisfactory ....
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Carana on May 24, 2013, 10:20:19 AM
...and obviously didn't know (do they now ?) what an EVRD is.
Was.
To be clear, the category "E"VRD was created with Eddie and ceased to exist when Eddie hung up his paws.
No other dog in the history of sniffer dogs ever owned the title.
True.
Personally, I find it feasible that Grime had found some way to enhance Eddie's training at some point with real cadaver scent or contaminated tissues (if so, presumably imported from somewhere). It would have given him an an edge over the services of other dog handlers with dogs trained exclusively on decomposing swine and human blood.
Even if this were the case, it wouldn't have desensitised him to the range of scents that were already within his training parameters, many of which can have perfectly innocent explanations.
Eddie was a canine GP, Keela was the haemotologist.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Chinagirl on May 24, 2013, 10:33:51 AM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Carana on May 24, 2013, 11:53:14 AM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
I'm not sure. His first inspection was on 31 July and the others spanned the first week of August.
He may have been still technically working for SYP, but in reality already self-employed depending on whether he had untaken vacation days left.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Benice on May 24, 2013, 01:15:45 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
I'm not sure. His first inspection was on 31 July and the others spanned the first week of August.
He may have been still technically working for SYP, but in reality already self-employed depending on whether he had untaken vacation days left.
Whichever it was - it's a fact that he had already decided to resign from the Police force to set up his own business and in future Eddie and Keela would be his source of income. I think it's unrealistic to say that this fact had no bearing or influence at all on his 'mindset' during his searching activities with his dogs, in a case being followed by millions worldwide. The man is only human after all. He must have considered the impact this case could have on his own future.
I would have more confidence in a dog handler who had no plans to leave the force at that time - so that there was no possibility of 'self-interest' creeping in.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: ferryman on May 24, 2013, 01:18:18 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
That quote (from The Mail) is wrong, CG.
SYP confirmed in a FOI answer that Grime retired in August.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: ferryman on May 24, 2013, 01:22:13 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
I'm not sure. His first inspection was on 31 July and the others spanned the first week of August.
He may have been still technically working for SYP, but in reality already self-employed depending on whether he had untaken vacation days left.
Yes, that's what I think is most likely. That he took leave leading up to retirement, was given immediate custody of the dogs and worked in PdL.
I did submit an FOI question of my own directly asking SYP whether he was employed by them when he worked in PdL and they refused to answer, strengthening my impression.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: AnneGuedes on May 24, 2013, 01:25:36 PM
The man is only human after all. He must have considered the impact this case could have on his own future.
Do you admit then, Benice, that Mr and Mrs McCann could have considered the impact on their own future of an eventual accident at home when they weren't there to prevent it or take care of its consequences, or of an eventual abduction in the street when little Madeleine was trying to find where they were ? Aren't they human after all ?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Benice on May 24, 2013, 01:31:24 PM
The man is only human after all. He must have considered the impact this case could have on his own future.
Do you admit then, Benice, that Mr and Mrs McCann could have considered the impact on their own future of an eventual accident at home when they weren't there to prevent it or take care of its consequences, or of an eventual abduction in the street when little Madeleine was trying to find where they were ? Aren't they human after all ?
I think their decisions and actions were made BECAUSE they too are ''only human''- and hence can get things wrong. That's why the phrase - 'human error' is understood and universally recognised by all.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 24, 2013, 01:32:21 PM
IMO this is just another one of those things we just won't know, nobody has seen an invoice made out to the PJ & unless we do. we don't know if it was Grime or the UK police who got paid for the services of the dogs.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: John on May 24, 2013, 03:37:47 PM
If Madeleine had died in an accident that evening then the amount of time for a cadaver scent to develop would have been very tight - experts say any where from 3 hours + for the body to start to release a scent that cant be classified as cadaver
But again it doesn't really matter as the PJ did not find any forensics that would help them. Nothing - this is what came out so loud in the files I have read - they were so sure that the dogs would find the smoking gun.
Again the alerting in the hire car to me signifies a big red flag to the accuracy to the dogs giving 100% positive alerts, I can accept that in a panic the parents might have hidden the body - though where always leaves me - but to then transfer a dead body a month plus later ? Bearing in mind that the " hiding " place must have been fairly close by going by the timelines and witness statements. I know that this is going over old ground but it still remains the crux of the argument, If you give the the motive as a given - then I have never yet seen a logical method and means
I totally agree. The PJ would have been able to frame the suspects had it not been for the fact that the case was opened up to international exposure and best British technical science in the form of DNA analysis. Had the McCanns been Portuguese the outcome would have been so much different for ALL concerned.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: John on May 24, 2013, 03:43:04 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business, had failed to keep up the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) licence that certified Eddie as a police 'cadaver dog'. Grime did have a second sniffer dog, Keela, but its licence expired a fortnight after they arrived in Jersey.
ACPO rules governing UK police dogs state: 'Dog and handler teams that fail to remain in-licence are deemed "not competent".' Grime admitted to The Mail on Sunday that the dog's licence had lapsed. He said: 'After I retired, my dogs were tested according to my own standards which are more stringent than ACPO's.
ETA So, we have only Mr. Grime to rely on with regard to the accuracy of the dogs, no independent authority. And Mr. Grime, as an independent consultant, effectively says: My dogs are excellent, because I say so.....
Pathetic wasn't it? I am still waiting on someone to tell me who got paid the tens of thousands of £'s for the fiasco ?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: DCI on May 24, 2013, 04:30:07 PM
Before release of his main report, John Lowe of the Forensic Science Service wrote a long email to Stuart Prior of Leicestershire Police about a particular result from the boot of the McCanns’ hire car, where some markers from a mixed DNA sample were the same as markers from the control DNA profile of Madeleine. 6 words from that email are key: “too complex for meaningful interpretation/inclusion”. In his main report, Lowe summarises that result without mention of Madeleine by name, repeating: “too complex for meaningful interpretation”. No contradiction at all.
I shan’t name and shame, but I have actually debated with people that think what was too complex for John Lowe, a forensic expert, to interpret could nevertheless be interpreted by a judge, or even a jury. The forum myth is one some people are loath to let go of. Certain claims of Martin Grime in his profile raise an eyebrow.
As a full-time Police Constable with South Yorkshire Police (SYP) (the most junior rank of serving officer in the British Police Force), he claims to have been also an advisor to the FBI and the US Department of justice. He claims to have been instrumental in training programmes in the US, and to have introduced swine cadavers/cadaver scent into training in the States. In some States of America, as everywhere in Britain, use of human cadaver or human cadaver scents is not acceptable, and in those States, as in Britain, swine cadavers are used to train dogs. It is surprising that Martin Grime should have taught the Americans anything new about that.
Grime claims that in a 6 year period in Britain, Eddie was deployed over 200 times. This disclosure under Freedom of Information (FOI) indicates just 37 deployments in the 5 year period 2003-2007. Either Eddie must have had one very busy year or Grime has got his sums wrong.
Some States in America use human cadavers to train cadaver dogs on what are known as ‘body farms’. Grime claims that Eddie has been trained on such a farm in the States. An FOI answer to a question I have submitted cited parts of a Personal Development review for the Year 2005-6 when it was stated that Eddie (then aged 5 or 6, and close to retirement) had been to the States for that training. The cited justification was, not that it would improve Eddie’s performance, but that it would “generate some income potential”.
Until his last day of service, the daily cost of hiring Eddie was just £10. And no documention confirming this apparent trip was ever received by SYP.
Still, Grime describes both Eddie and Keela as the only “assets” (as he describes them) of their type in the world. Clearly Eddie’s apparent training on a body farm in America wouldn’t make him that, because many dogs in America are trained the same, so what would? Whatever it is, perhaps that is why there are no references to the “Enhanced” Victim Recovery dog status outside Eddie and Grime?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Also in Portuguese.
This thread has gone dreadfully off topic. There are plenty other ones to bash Mr Grime, the dogs and Mr Amaral, see any of Ferrymans threads.
Carana,there were no human remains in 5a, so that was not the reason Mr Harrison recommended sending the dog in, three months later.
You might consider it bashing Redblossom as is your prerogative but why shouldn't they attract criticism? After all they both failed miserably to prove anything and one was even forced to resign from the police force in disgrace before he was kicked out having been convicted of a criminal offence by his peers.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Redblossom on May 24, 2013, 05:06:41 PM
This thread has gone dreadfully off topic. There are plenty other ones to bash Mr Grime, the dogs and Mr Amaral, see any of Ferrymans threads.
Carana,there were no human remains in 5a, so that was not the reason Mr Harrison recommended sending the dog in, three months later.
You might consider it bashing Redblossom as is your prerogative but why shouldn't they attract criticism? After all they both failed miserably to prove anything and one was even forced to resign from the police force in disgrace before he was kicked out having been convicted of a criminal offence by his peers.
You can criticise them all you like but on the proper threads specifically designed for it and there are plenty of them about,I asked a very very specific question and it has descended, very predictably of course, into a Grime is a conman, liar, fraudster fest, its pathetic at best
PS Mr Grimes job is not to prove anything, neither was Amarals, its the courts who try to do that
And Amaral was taken off the Madeleine case in Oct 07, and worked until June 08 in another dept,after which he resigned of his own accord, he was not kicked out by anyone and his conviction was not until 2009
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Carana on May 24, 2013, 05:15:08 PM
This thread has gone dreadfully off topic. There are plenty other ones to bash Mr Grime, the dogs and Mr Amaral, see any of Ferrymans threads.
Carana,there were no human remains in 5a, so that was not the reason Mr Harrison recommended sending the dog in, three months later.
I disagree. And I say that whoever was responsible. They might have found something gruesome (a bit of bone stuck down a shower drain, remains in the garden, a blood-soaked mattress with her DNA that had been turned over or anything in some kind of loft or crawl area).
The results turned out to be negative in terms of any forensic evidence, but at least it was checked. Eventually.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: John on May 24, 2013, 05:36:29 PM
This thread has gone dreadfully off topic. There are plenty other ones to bash Mr Grime, the dogs and Mr Amaral, see any of Ferrymans threads.
Carana,there were no human remains in 5a, so that was not the reason Mr Harrison recommended sending the dog in, three months later.
You might consider it bashing Redblossom as is your prerogative but why shouldn't they attract criticism? After all they both failed miserably to prove anything and one was even forced to resign from the police force in disgrace before he was kicked out having been convicted of a criminal offence by his peers.
You can criticise them all you like but on the proper threads specifically designed for it and there are plenty of them about,I asked a very very specific question and it has descended, very predictably of course, into a Grime is a conman, liar, fraudster fest, its pathetic at best
PS Mr Grimes job is not to prove anything, neither was Amarals, its the courts who try to do that
And Amaral was taken off the Madeleine case in Oct 07, and worked until June 08 in another dept,after which he resigned of his own accord, he was not kicked out by anyone and his conviction was not until 2009
Get a grip Redblossom and please read my post properly. Amaral had nowhere to go after his stupid claims against the McCanns. He was humiliated when he was removed from his job as coordinator by his superiors and he knew that if he didn't resign he would be kicked out and lose his pension. He wasn't prepared to take that risk.
Now he is going to be humiliated all over again when he is forced to settle the civil suit brought against him by the McCanns.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Carana on May 24, 2013, 05:41:27 PM
This thread has gone dreadfully off topic. There are plenty other ones to bash Mr Grime, the dogs and Mr Amaral, see any of Ferrymans threads.
Carana,there were no human remains in 5a, so that was not the reason Mr Harrison recommended sending the dog in, three months later.
You might consider it bashing Redblossom as is your prerogative but why shouldn't they attract criticism? After all they both failed miserably to prove anything and one was even forced to resign from the police force in disgrace before he was kicked out having been convicted of a criminal offence by his peers.
You can criticise them all you like but on the proper threads specifically designed for it and there are plenty of them about,I asked a very very specific question and it has descended, very predictably of course, into a Grime is a conman, liar, fraudster fest, its pathetic at best
PS Mr Grimes job is not to prove anything, neither was Amarals, its the courts who try to do that
And Amaral was taken off the Madeleine case in Oct 07, and worked until June 08 in another dept,after which he resigned of his own accord, he was not kicked out by anyone and his conviction was not until 2009
Are you sure that that is entirely accurate?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: John on May 24, 2013, 06:33:08 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
I'm not sure. His first inspection was on 31 July and the others spanned the first week of August.
He may have been still technically working for SYP, but in reality already self-employed depending on whether he had untaken vacation days left.
Whichever it was - it's a fact that he had already decided to resign from the Police force to set up his own business and in future Eddie and Keela would be his source of income. I think it's unrealistic to say that this fact had no bearing or influence at all on his 'mindset' during his searching activities with his dogs, in a case being followed by millions worldwide. The man is only human after all. He must have considered the impact this case could have on his own future.
I would have more confidence in a dog handler who had no plans to leave the force at that time - so that there was no possibility of 'self-interest' creeping in.
The dogs were the property of the police so how did he end up owning this asset? Isn't it the case that the dogs would have been totally useless without Grime? If grime went the dogs had to go too.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: John on May 24, 2013, 06:36:40 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
That quote (from The Mail) is wrong, CG.
SYP confirmed in a FOI answer that Grime retired in August.
So let's get this straight then. It would have been South Yorkshire Police whom the Portuguese would have had to pay for services rendered and not the serving constable Grime?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: DCI on May 24, 2013, 06:43:52 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
That quote (from The Mail) is wrong, CG.
SYP confirmed in a FOI answer that Grime retired in August.
So let's get this straight then. It would have been South Yorkshire Police whom the Portuguese would have had to pay for services rendered and not the serving constable Grime?
Don't know if you read my post on page1, of this thread, John.
Until his last day of service, the daily cost of hiring Eddie was just £10. And no documention confirming this apparent trip was ever received by SYP.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: ferryman on May 24, 2013, 06:44:54 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
That quote (from The Mail) is wrong, CG.
SYP confirmed in a FOI answer that Grime retired in August.
So let's get this straight then. It would have been South Yorkshire Police whom the Portuguese would have had to pay for services rendered and not the serving constable Grime?
Well, not necessarily, John.
Grime could have taken annual leave leading up to retirement, been given immediate custody of the dogs, and put in a spot of freelancing work while on annual leave ...
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: ferryman on May 24, 2013, 06:48:27 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
That quote (from The Mail) is wrong, CG.
SYP confirmed in a FOI answer that Grime retired in August.
So let's get this straight then. It would have been South Yorkshire Police whom the Portuguese would have had to pay for services rendered and not the serving constable Grime?
Don't know if you read my post on page1, of this thread, John.
Until his last day of service, the daily cost of hiring Eddie was just £10. And no documention confirming this apparent trip was ever received by SYP.
Sadly that point can't now, be verified because SYP have pulled all their answers.
But one of them gave a detailed breakdown of the costs of hiring the dog.
The bulk of the cost is based on the salary and national insurance contribution of the handler.
Then there was a bit thrown in for travel and an additional, separate, fee for the hire of the dog, which was £10.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Carana on May 24, 2013, 06:52:51 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
That quote (from The Mail) is wrong, CG.
SYP confirmed in a FOI answer that Grime retired in August.
So let's get this straight then. It would have been South Yorkshire Police whom the Portuguese would have had to pay for services rendered and not the serving constable Grime?
Well, not necessarily, John.
Grime could have taken annual leave leading up to retirement, been given immediate custody of the dogs, and put in a spot of freelancing work while on annual leave ...
I agree with FM. We don't know that this was the case, but it's fairly common practice when changing from one employment situation to another.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Redblossom on May 24, 2013, 06:57:31 PM
The bulk of the cost is based on the salary and national insurance contribution of the handler.
***
The cost of the dogs in PDL as stated by Mr Harrison was 1000 a day, are you sayng Grime was on c360k a year? LOL, how stupid does that sound
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Redblossom on May 24, 2013, 06:58:39 PM
This thread has gone dreadfully off topic. There are plenty other ones to bash Mr Grime, the dogs and Mr Amaral, see any of Ferrymans threads.
Carana,there were no human remains in 5a, so that was not the reason Mr Harrison recommended sending the dog in, three months later.
You might consider it bashing Redblossom as is your prerogative but why shouldn't they attract criticism? After all they both failed miserably to prove anything and one was even forced to resign from the police force in disgrace before he was kicked out having been convicted of a criminal offence by his peers.
You can criticise them all you like but on the proper threads specifically designed for it and there are plenty of them about,I asked a very very specific question and it has descended, very predictably of course, into a Grime is a conman, liar, fraudster fest, its pathetic at best
PS Mr Grimes job is not to prove anything, neither was Amarals, its the courts who try to do that
And Amaral was taken off the Madeleine case in Oct 07, and worked until June 08 in another dept,after which he resigned of his own accord, he was not kicked out by anyone and his conviction was not until 2009
Are you sure that that is entirely accurate?
Which bit, as if it matters, is not accurate to you
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Redblossom on May 24, 2013, 07:00:08 PM
This thread has gone dreadfully off topic. There are plenty other ones to bash Mr Grime, the dogs and Mr Amaral, see any of Ferrymans threads.
Carana,there were no human remains in 5a, so that was not the reason Mr Harrison recommended sending the dog in, three months later.
You might consider it bashing Redblossom as is your prerogative but why shouldn't they attract criticism? After all they both failed miserably to prove anything and one was even forced to resign from the police force in disgrace before he was kicked out having been convicted of a criminal offence by his peers.
You can criticise them all you like but on the proper threads specifically designed for it and there are plenty of them about,I asked a very very specific question and it has descended, very predictably of course, into a Grime is a conman, liar, fraudster fest, its pathetic at best
PS Mr Grimes job is not to prove anything, neither was Amarals, its the courts who try to do that
And Amaral was taken off the Madeleine case in Oct 07, and worked until June 08 in another dept,after which he resigned of his own accord, he was not kicked out by anyone and his conviction was not until 2009
Get a grip Redblossom and please read my post properly. Amaral had nowhere to go after his stupid claims against the McCanns. He was humiliated when he was removed from his job as coordinator by his superiors and he knew that if he didn't resign he would be kicked out and lose his pension. He wasn't prepared to take that risk.
Now he is going to be humiliated all over again when he is forced to settle the civil suit brought against him by the McCanns.
Well you can gloat if and when that happens then John
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: registrar on May 24, 2013, 07:08:17 PM
This thread has gone dreadfully off topic. There are plenty other ones to bash Mr Grime, the dogs and Mr Amaral, see any of Ferrymans threads.
Carana,there were no human remains in 5a, so that was not the reason Mr Harrison recommended sending the dog in, three months later.
You might consider it bashing Redblossom as is your prerogative but why shouldn't they attract criticism? After all they both failed miserably to prove anything and one was even forced to resign from the police force in disgrace before he was kicked out having been convicted of a criminal offence by his peers.
You can criticise them all you like but on the proper threads specifically designed for it and there are plenty of them about,I asked a very very specific question and it has descended, very predictably of course, into a Grime is a conman, liar, fraudster fest, its pathetic at best
PS Mr Grimes job is not to prove anything, neither was Amarals, its the courts who try to do that
And Amaral was taken off the Madeleine case in Oct 07, and worked until June 08 in another dept,after which he resigned of his own accord, he was not kicked out by anyone and his conviction was not until 2009
Get a grip Redblossom and please read my post properly. Amaral had nowhere to go after his stupid claims against the McCanns. He was humiliated when he was removed from his job as coordinator by his superiors and he knew that if he didn't resign he would be kicked out and lose his pension. He wasn't prepared to take that risk.
Now he is going to be humiliated all over again when he is forced to settle the civil suit brought against him by the McCanns.
Well you can gloat if and when that happens then John
You've been gloating for six years at the suffering of parents who's child is missing
Are you to tell us that this is acceptable behaviour?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: John on May 24, 2013, 07:20:27 PM
Get a grip Redblossom and please read my post properly. Amaral had nowhere to go after his stupid claims against the McCanns. He was humiliated when he was removed from his job as coordinator by his superiors and he knew that if he didn't resign he would be kicked out and lose his pension. He wasn't prepared to take that risk.
Now he is going to be humiliated all over again when he is forced to settle the civil suit brought against him by the McCanns.
Well you can gloat if and when that happens then John
What a fool he was, @)(++(*
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: registrar on May 24, 2013, 07:32:49 PM
Not bothered anymore, registrar, Im out of is place, no point anymore might as well be reading stop the myths, definitely NOT an imparyial and unbiased place
Shame they have seen fit and be allowed to hijack this place, doesnt change a single thing though, however many threads people start which are based on lies or complete bollocks......
Yawn.....floors all yours lets see who wipes it in the end
Chow 8((()*/ 8((()*/
Happy trails
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 24, 2013, 07:39:25 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
I'm not sure. His first inspection was on 31 July and the others spanned the first week of August.
He may have been still technically working for SYP, but in reality already self-employed depending on whether he had untaken vacation days left.
Whichever it was - it's a fact that he had already decided to resign from the Police force to set up his own business and in future Eddie and Keela would be his source of income. I think it's unrealistic to say that this fact had no bearing or influence at all on his 'mindset' during his searching activities with his dogs, in a case being followed by millions worldwide. The man is only human after all. He must have considered the impact this case could have on his own future.
I would have more confidence in a dog handler who had no plans to leave the force at that time - so that there was no possibility of 'self-interest' creeping in.
The dogs were the property of the police so how did he end up owning this asset? Isn't it the case that the dogs would have been totally useless without Grime? If grime went the dogs had to go too.
It is not worth retraining a dog for a different handler. Most Police dogs retire with their handlers; many police dogs when they retire become household pets of the handlers. This goes for all police dogs.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: DCI on May 24, 2013, 07:58:12 PM
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business
Isn't there an argument somewhere on one of these threads about whether or not Grime was still a serving a police officer when he went to Portugal? Seems that the no's have it ....
That quote (from The Mail) is wrong, CG.
SYP confirmed in a FOI answer that Grime retired in August.
So let's get this straight then. It would have been South Yorkshire Police whom the Portuguese would have had to pay for services rendered and not the serving constable Grime?
Well, not necessarily, John.
Grime could have taken annual leave leading up to retirement, been given immediate custody of the dogs, and put in a spot of freelancing work while on annual leave ...
Seems he did Carana
Yet Grime, who had left South Yorkshire police in July 2007 and was selling his dogs' services through his private business, had failed to keep up the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) licence that certified Eddie as a police 'cadaver dog'.
Grime did have a second sniffer dog, Keela, but its licence expired a fortnight after they arrived in Jersey.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: DCI on May 24, 2013, 08:13:44 PM
Seems Eddie had a thing about walls 8(>((
Current
•Director at GSS International •Owner at Forensic Canine Search Consultancy
Past
•Police Dog Training Instructor at Uk Police •Military at British military
Education
•UKACPO canine trainer
Martin Grime’s Summary
•UKNPIA / FBI Forensic Canine Program expert adviser / consultant.
Martin Grime’s Specialties:
•Search advice. •Training and operational planning homicide victim search.
Martin Grime’s Experience
•Director - GSS International June 2009-Present (1 year 1 month): Canine Director for an International company that provides specialist search services and training in the military and law enforcement environment. •Owner- Forensic Canine Search Consultancy-August 2007 — Present (2 years 11 months) •Homicide Victim Search / Missing person search Forensic Canine search consultant. •Operational deployment and training of specialist canine search units. •FBI specialist advisor. •California Narcotics Canine Association. •Police Dog Training Instructor UK Police-January 1984 — August 2007 (23 years 8 months) •Police Dog Training Instructor •Human remains search.
Military
•British military-January 1975 — April 1984 (9 years 4 months)
Martin Grime’s Education
•UKACPO canine trainer
Activities and Societies:
•Private sector qualified canine trainer. •Member California Narcotic Canine Association
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 25, 2013, 12:28:28 PM
I find it unbelievable that the people who put their faith in these dogs totally ignore Mr. Grime's explicit instructions on how to assess the dog alerts.
Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.
There simply were NO confirmed "cadaver scent" alerts by any dog in this case, so why do some keep insisting on ignoring the handler's own words on the matter?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Puffin on May 25, 2013, 12:33:46 PM
I find it unbelievable that the people who put their faith in these dogs totally ignore Mr. Grime's explicit instructions on how to assess the dog alerts.
Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.
There simply were NO confirmed "cadaver scent" alerts by any dog in this case, so why do some keep insisting on ignoring the handler's own words on the matter?
Because it runs counter to their totally ingrained and blinkered belief that only they are right. It's a mindset you will never change how ever hard you try.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 25, 2013, 12:42:18 PM
I find it unbelievable that the people who put their faith in these dogs totally ignore Mr. Grime's explicit instructions on how to assess the dog alerts.
Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.
There simply were NO confirmed "cadaver scent" alerts by any dog in this case, so why do some keep insisting on ignoring the handler's own words on the matter?
Because it runs counter to their totally ingrained and blinkered belief that only they are right. It's a mindset you will never change how ever hard you try.
That's true, but still, slightly unfair then to accuse us of insulting Mr. Grime by repeating what the man actually said. Find it more insulting to imply that he didn't know what he was talking about.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Puffin on May 25, 2013, 12:49:46 PM
I find it unbelievable that the people who put their faith in these dogs totally ignore Mr. Grime's explicit instructions on how to assess the dog alerts.
Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.
There simply were NO confirmed "cadaver scent" alerts by any dog in this case, so why do some keep insisting on ignoring the handler's own words on the matter?
Because it runs counter to their totally ingrained and blinkered belief that only they are right. It's a mindset you will never change how ever hard you try.
That's true, but still, slightly unfair then to accuse us of insulting Mr. Grime by repeating what the man actually said. Find it more insulting to imply that he didn't know what he was talking about.
They consider anyone who dares question their version or fixed ideas of what happened as being fools or even worse as being IN IT. Someone has accused Mr Justice Tugendhat of being IN IT, as his brother is a Tory, because he found Bercow guilty of defemation. Now that brought a definite smile to my face. ?{)(**
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 25, 2013, 12:57:45 PM
I've grown tired of counting the amount of people who are supposedly "in on it", it's easier to count those who supposedly are NOT, they're far less. ?{)(**
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Puffin on May 25, 2013, 01:02:44 PM
I've grown tired of counting the amount of people who are supposedly "in on it", it's easier to count those who supposedly are NOT, they're far less. ?{)(**
Well, I'm happy to be classed as being IN ON IT - by the way, what is IT anyway and is it yucky, like mud, to be IN or ON? 8)--))
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: registrar on May 25, 2013, 01:24:14 PM
Thanks Mrs. B for Grime's comment:
'Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc. '
That to my feeble mind renders the wonderdogs as accurate as DOWSING or Krügel's box of crystals
Pseudo science - without the science
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 25, 2013, 02:06:42 PM
'Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc. '
That to my feeble mind renders the wonderdogs as accurate as DOWSING or Krügel's box of crystals
Pseudo science - without the science
That is going too far and is just incorrect. The dogs are accurate to a better level than chance. Dowsing is pure chance.
Dissing the dogs to that degree just opens up an avenue for forkers to attack rational debate.
It is scientifically provable that the dogs are considerably better than chance in any detection chance- else they would not be used at all!
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: registrar on May 25, 2013, 02:20:23 PM
'Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc. '
That to my feeble mind renders the wonderdogs as accurate as DOWSING or Krügel's box of crystals
Pseudo science - without the science
That is going too far and is just incorrect. The dogs are accurate to a better level than chance. Dowsing is pure chance.
Dissing the dogs to that degree just opens up an avenue for forkers to attack rational debate.
It is scientifically provable that the dogs are considerably better than chance in any detection chance- else they would not be used at all!
Perchance Mary Bell,
but G&K are academics - and they gave Krügel's box of wonders the thumbs up.
Did they not?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 25, 2013, 02:24:45 PM
Straw Man argument ISAR.
The dogs do have measurable scientific validity. Just not certainty!
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: registrar on May 25, 2013, 02:30:12 PM
Ahhh diddums
as was well exposed both in Luz and Jersey
the penny has finally dropped
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 25, 2013, 02:33:24 PM
These dogs, as Mr. Grime himself points out, are used to give forensic scientists & police an indication as to where possible forensic evidence may be found. They are investigative tools, not more nor less, they themselves do not provide evidence. The worst damage done to the reputation of the dogs, IMO, has been done by those who claim a) the dogs are infallible & b) that their indications ARE evidence. It simply isn't true.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2013, 02:36:31 PM
what are the dog's supposed to be alerting to? If a corpse had been there, is it not logical for at least a small amount of dna to have been found. No dna belonging to Maddie therefore no evidence of a corpse. Perhaps that's why SY believe she may still be alive.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: registrar on May 25, 2013, 02:42:58 PM
These dogs, as Mr. Grime himself points out, are used to give forensic scientists & police an indication as to where possible forensic evidence may be found. They are investigative tools, not more nor less, they themselves do not provide evidence. The worst damage done to the reputation of the dogs, IMO, has been done by those who claim a) the dogs are infallible & b) that their indications ARE evidence. It simply isn't true.
Precisely, the mantra that the dogs (woof woof) deliver scientific proof of wrongdoing has been the Achilles heel of the detractors' campaign.
The article of faith they clung on so hard.
And here's the propaganda angle - and I think it's a vital one:
the video - released to the masses - the dog barking it's head off in the car park - powerful stuff - who could not be moved by that?
Well orchestrated - shame the brown stuff hit the spinning thing in Jersey
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 25, 2013, 02:59:34 PM
what are the dog's supposed to be alerting to? If a corpse had been there, is it not logical for at least a small amount of dna to have been found. No dna belonging to Maddie therefore no evidence of a corpse. Perhaps that's why SY believe she may still be alive.
Not really, as we already know the apartment had been thoroughly cleaned by OC cleaners at the very least four times as four different families had spent their holidays in that apartment, after the McCann family & before the dogs were brought in & forensic samples taken, based on those dog indications. To that can be added that both dogs alerted to residual scents of dried blood from live people, not to mention the reported & disturbing alerts to 2nd hand furniture in the Shannon Matthews case, which should make alarm bells ring pretty loud.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: sadie on May 25, 2013, 03:00:40 PM
Who do you think orchestrated it Registrar?
Amaral, or Grimes ... or who?
I agree it is powerful propaganda, very powerful, and it is only by careful analysis by such as Hb, debunker and others on here, that its fallibility has been exposed.
Helped along, as you say, by the Jersey disaster.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: registrar on May 25, 2013, 03:16:13 PM
I agree it is powerful propaganda, very powerful, and it is only by careful analysis by such as Hb, debunker and others on here, that its fallibility has been exposed.
Helped along, as you say, by the Jersey disaster.
Dunno - but speculation leads me down the path that the PJ generally were so frustrated with the lack of progress in the case and the worldwide 24/7 attention on them
That extreme measures were being deployed.
Portugal took the presidency of the EU that year (1st of July 2007) a LOT was at stake.
A video purporting that salmon eating dogs from the UK had implicated G and/or K to have had a part in murdering their first born, Madeleine. Might have appeared to be an attractive option.
My take - the PJ panicked - and needed a quick result.
FSS recorded no conclusive results
G&K did not play ball
Later Grime was humiliated with the same dogs in Jersey.
The house of cards fell apart.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: registrar on May 25, 2013, 03:45:35 PM
Portugal's progressives try to rid herself of her Salazarian heritage
(only a few years ago the dictator was voted the greatest Portuguese ever in a TV poll)
Madeleine's disappearance got in the way of that
It's deeper, much deeper than just a case of disappearance
And to put Amaral - a manifest symbol of the politics of Salazar - in the driving seat of this investigation
Was asking for trouble from the off
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: ferryman on May 25, 2013, 03:50:19 PM
How manifest was the Amaral symbol before the Madeleine investigation?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 25, 2013, 05:25:06 PM
I have always said that the dogs have a probability of being correct between 60 and 90 % of the time for single marks, 40-80% for double marking my Eddie and Keela.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 25, 2013, 05:25:58 PM
These dogs, as Mr. Grime himself points out, are used to give forensic scientists & police an indication as to where possible forensic evidence may be found. They are investigative tools, not more nor less, they themselves do not provide evidence. The worst damage done to the reputation of the dogs, IMO, has been done by those who claim a) the dogs are infallible & b) that their indications ARE evidence. It simply isn't true.
There alerts ARE evidence, circumstantial and untrustworthy, but evidence all the same.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: sadie on May 25, 2013, 05:39:01 PM
I agree it is powerful propaganda, very powerful, and it is only by careful analysis by such as Hb, debunker and others on here, that its fallibility has been exposed.
Helped along, as you say, by the Jersey disaster.
Dunno - but speculation leads me down the path that the PJ generally were so frustrated with the lack of progress in the case and the worldwide 24/7 attention on them
That extreme measures were being deployed.
Portugal took the presidency of the EU that year (1st of July 2007) a LOT was at stake.
A video purporting that salmon eating dogs from the UK had implicated G and/or K to have had a part in murdering their first born, Madeleine. Might have appeared to be an attractive option.
My take - the PJ panicked - and needed a quick result.
FSS recorded no conclusive results
G&K did not play ball
Later Grime was humiliated with the same dogs in Jersey.
The house of cards fell apart.
Makes sense.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: sadie on May 25, 2013, 05:46:06 PM
Portugal's progressives try to rid herself of her Salazarian heritage
(only a few years ago the dictator was voted the greatest Portuguese ever in a TV poll)
Madeleine's disappearance got in the way of that
It's deeper, much deeper than just a case of disappearance
And to put Amaral - a manifest symbol of the politics of Salazar - in the driving seat of this investigation
Was asking for trouble from the off
I find your take interesting. It is somewhat in line with my thoughts
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 25, 2013, 05:49:57 PM
I'm not entering in a discussion whatever anyone considers to be evidence or not. I am pointing out what Grime himself has stated in the official files.
Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.
He's the supposed expert on his own dogs, one assumes, so I'd go with what the man himself says.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: sadie on May 25, 2013, 05:51:26 PM
These dogs, as Mr. Grime himself points out, are used to give forensic scientists & police an indication as to where possible forensic evidence may be found. They are investigative tools, not more nor less, they themselves do not provide evidence. The worst damage done to the reputation of the dogs, IMO, has been done by those who claim a) the dogs are infallible & b) that their indications ARE evidence. It simply isn't true.
There alerts ARE evidence, circumstantial and untrustworthy, but evidence all the same.
I agree, but I would qualify with the additional word "possibly"
.... but possibly evidence all the same.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 25, 2013, 05:55:10 PM
I'm not entering in a discussion whatever anyone considers to be evidence or not. I am pointing out what Grime himself has stated in the official files.
Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.
He's the supposed expert on his own dogs, one assumes, so I'd go with what the man himself says.
That refers to "evidence of DNA, etc". A dog alert alone may also be evidence (not very convincing but evidence all the same.)
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 25, 2013, 05:55:48 PM
These dogs, as Mr. Grime himself points out, are used to give forensic scientists & police an indication as to where possible forensic evidence may be found. They are investigative tools, not more nor less, they themselves do not provide evidence. The worst damage done to the reputation of the dogs, IMO, has been done by those who claim a) the dogs are infallible & b) that their indications ARE evidence. It simply isn't true.
There alerts ARE evidence, circumstantial and untrustworthy, but evidence all the same.
I agree, but I would qualify with the additional word "possibly"
.... but possibly evidence all the same.
What would amke the evidence Possible or Not Possible?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 25, 2013, 05:59:38 PM
I'm not entering in a discussion whatever anyone considers to be evidence or not. I am pointing out what Grime himself has stated in the official files.
Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.
He's the supposed expert on his own dogs, one assumes, so I'd go with what the man himself says.
That refers to "evidence of DNA, etc". A dog alert alone may also be evidence (not very convincing but evidence all the same.)
I know that's your opinion, I just don't share it.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: sadie on May 25, 2013, 06:08:44 PM
These dogs, as Mr. Grime himself points out, are used to give forensic scientists & police an indication as to where possible forensic evidence may be found. They are investigative tools, not more nor less, they themselves do not provide evidence. The worst damage done to the reputation of the dogs, IMO, has been done by those who claim a) the dogs are infallible & b) that their indications ARE evidence. It simply isn't true.
There alerts ARE evidence, circumstantial and untrustworthy, but evidence all the same.
I agree, but I would qualify with the additional word "possibly"
.... but possibly evidence all the same.
What would amke the evidence Possible or Not Possible?
Oh, I thought that you said it only stood a 40% to 80% chance of being correct ?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: registrar on May 25, 2013, 06:21:47 PM
40%- 80%?
might as well toss a coin after invoking 'Did the parents do the deed?'
should give you a mathematically correct result
about half the time
(and a darn side cheaper than the 90k farce in Jersey cost)
Dross
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: sadie on May 25, 2013, 06:29:52 PM
That's why I would qualify it as only possible evidence. Certainly not absolute evidence.
Not by a long chalk.
Therefore unsafe.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 25, 2013, 09:34:34 PM
I'm not entering in a discussion whatever anyone considers to be evidence or not. I am pointing out what Grime himself has stated in the official files.
Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.
He's the supposed expert on his own dogs, one assumes, so I'd go with what the man himself says.
That refers to "evidence of DNA, etc". A dog alert alone may also be evidence (not very convincing but evidence all the same.)
I know that's your opinion, I just don't share it.
Not opinion. Fact. Evidence is any fact that can be brought to bear on a matter. Dog alerts have been admitted in UK and US courts.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: ferryman on May 25, 2013, 09:41:49 PM
I'm not entering in a discussion whatever anyone considers to be evidence or not. I am pointing out what Grime himself has stated in the official files.
Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.
He's the supposed expert on his own dogs, one assumes, so I'd go with what the man himself says.
That refers to "evidence of DNA, etc". A dog alert alone may also be evidence (not very convincing but evidence all the same.)
I know that's your opinion, I just don't share it.
Not opinion. Fact. Evidence is any fact that can be brought to bear on a matter. Dog alerts have been admitted in UK and US courts.
Fact in Scotland (that uncorroborated dog alerts are admissible in court as evidence); fiction in England.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 25, 2013, 10:50:44 PM
Fact in Scotland (that uncorroborated dog alerts are admissible in court as evidence); fiction in England.
I gave a cite for two cases where dog evidence was accepted in England. My statement is correct. You are yet to prove that all dog alerts save those by Eddie are acceptable in English Courts. You cannot do this becasue there is no rule excluding such evidence and the English rules of evidence are that no evidence can be omitted without cause. I used to believe what you believe, but someone better versed than I was explained the Laws of Evidence better than I had understood them. There is still a chance that you too could learn that you are not keeping to the truth.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: gilet on May 26, 2013, 05:14:40 PM
I don't just think there can be no reliance on the dogs' unconfirmed alerts. I actually know that as a fact.
And how do I know that?
Well Mr. Grime told us that,
Quote
...no evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.
09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2477
Also Mark Harrison (sic)
The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.
But our arch promoter of truth in all matters will no doubt continue insisting till hell freezes over that an alert by a dog of a completely different discipline "proves" uncorroborated cadaver dog alerts are admissible as evidence in court ....
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 27, 2013, 07:19:20 AM
The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.
But our arch promoter of truth in all matters will no doubt continue insisting till hell freezes over that an alert by a dog of a completely different discipline "proves" uncorroborated cadaver dog alerts are admissible as evidence in court ....
Dog evidence has been admitted in UK courts.
Rules of evidence allow all information to be put before a court that has not been excluded for casue.
Cadaver Dog evidence has never been formally excluded.
Therefore until there is a formal decision that cadaver dog evidence is excluded, it remains admissible.
If you think that it is inadmissible but other scent dog evidence is admissible, please cite where in case law this addition to rules of evidence has been made.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mrs. B on May 27, 2013, 09:13:59 AM
The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.
But our arch promoter of truth in all matters will no doubt continue insisting till hell freezes over that an alert by a dog of a completely different discipline "proves" uncorroborated cadaver dog alerts are admissible as evidence in court ....
Well, that remains to be seen in any real case, in THIS case, however, the dog alerts would not pass the test of admissible evidence IMO, as their RELIANCE has been put in serious doubt on several (highly publicized) occasions.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: ferryman on May 27, 2013, 09:28:32 AM
Well, that remains to be seen in any real case, in THIS case, however, the dog alerts would not pass the test of admissible evidence IMO, as their RELIANCE has been put in serious doubt on several (highly publicized) occasions.
In this case they definitely wouldn't from the car because Eddie didn't react to the boot, only Keela did (blood but not cadaver scent); and Eddie's reaction to the ignition key was to Gerry's blood (not incriminating).
All the other reactions were either in places where Madeleine lived (no surprise to find her DNA there) or in places Madeleine is known, definitely, never to have gone near (no chance of finding Madeleine's DNA).
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 27, 2013, 12:11:47 PM
Well, that remains to be seen in any real case, in THIS case, however, the dog alerts would not pass the test of admissible evidence IMO, as their RELIANCE has been put in serious doubt on several (highly publicized) occasions.
In your opinion, fine. But it remains a FACT that there is currently no impediment in English law to exclude cadaver dog evidence. Unless you can prove this wrong by any cite
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2013, 12:21:25 PM
What is the evidence to support the cadaver dog evidence?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 27, 2013, 12:24:07 PM
Any information is evidence unless excluded for cause.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: ferryman on May 27, 2013, 12:27:31 PM
In your opinion, fine. But it remains a FACT that there is currently no impediment in English law to exclude cadaver dog evidence. Unless you can prove this wrong by any cite
Let's see, we've produced cites of two former serving UK police officers and 1 case of where an uncorroborated cadaver dog alert was excluded.
You've produced a case where an alert by a sniffer dog of a completely different discipline (not a cadaver dog) was accepted in court and your own word.
That's it.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 27, 2013, 12:37:06 PM
Let's see, we've produced cites of two former serving UK police officers and 1 case of where an uncorroborated cadaver dog alert was excluded.
You've produced a case where an alert by a sniffer dog of a completely different discipline (not a cadaver dog) was accepted in court and your own word.
That's it.
Run the trial cite by me again- specifically where it is recorded as a formal decision on admissibility and reasons for the exclusion.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: ferryman on May 27, 2013, 12:40:07 PM
The fact that it "emerged" a year after the trial that a cadaver dog had alerted ...
The alert was excluded from the trial.
That's why it "emerged" a year later.
Logical flaw there. No connection between the FACT that the evidence was not used and any suggestion that it was excluded by the judge.
I think we may have to agree that as it currently stands, although cadaver dog evidence has not yet been used in an English court (although it has in other Common Law Systems), there is no ruling extant to exclude it (unless you have a cite.)
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Redblossom on May 27, 2013, 08:15:32 PM
To go back to my Op, apart from the fact that no one can prove cadaver scent lasts no longer than a month, in fact studies prove it DOES,can anyone who can copy and paste from KMs book post her paragraph on Zapata and the dogs, telling how they are reliable only 20-40% of the time and saying after a few hours or so after body parts were removed in some test, and that three months later would be even worse? thanks in advance
Oh she forgot to mention in her denigration that Zapata confessed
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 27, 2013, 09:32:31 PM
To go back to my Op, apart from the fact that no one can prove cadaver scent lasts no longer than a month, in fact studies prove it DOES,can anyone who can copy and paste from KMs book post her paragraph on Zapata and the dogs, telling how they are reliable only 20-40% of the time and saying after a few hours or so after body parts were removed in some test, and that three months later would be even worse? thanks in advance
Oh she forgot to mention in her denigration that Zapata confessed
Snigger, spin is so awful at any time
Any scent's continued detectability depends on a variety of things- length of exposure, permeability of the contaminated material, gtype of contamination (liquid, solid etc.) And length of time elapsed since the contamination.
Short contact with tiling by a clothed body would disappear more quickly than long contact with a carpet by a naked body that was exuding bodily fluid would last much longer.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Redblossom on May 27, 2013, 09:34:19 PM
To go back to my Op, apart from the fact that no one can prove cadaver scent lasts no longer than a month, in fact studies prove it DOES,can anyone who can copy and paste from KMs book post her paragraph on Zapata and the dogs, telling how they are reliable only 20-40% of the time and saying after a few hours or so after body parts were removed in some test, and that three months later would be even worse? thanks in advance
Oh she forgot to mention in her denigration that Zapata confessed
Snigger, spin is so awful at any time
Any scent's continued detectability depends on a variety of things- length of exposure, permeability of the contaminated material, gtype of contamination (liquid, solid etc.) And length of time elapsed since the contamination.
Short contact with tiling by a clothed body would disappear more quickly than long contact with a carpet by a naked body that was exuding bodily fluid would last much longer.
And? How does that excuse KMs disingenuous and scurrilous hatchet job on cadaver dogs? What possessed her to do it in the first place? She is wrong so why?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 27, 2013, 09:38:04 PM
To go back to my Op, apart from the fact that no one can prove cadaver scent lasts no longer than a month, in fact studies prove it DOES,can anyone who can copy and paste from KMs book post her paragraph on Zapata and the dogs, telling how they are reliable only 20-40% of the time and saying after a few hours or so after body parts were removed in some test, and that three months later would be even worse? thanks in advance
Oh she forgot to mention in her denigration that Zapata confessed
Snigger, spin is so awful at any time
Any scent's continued detectability depends on a variety of things- length of exposure, permeability of the contaminated material, gtype of contamination (liquid, solid etc.) And length of time elapsed since the contamination.
Short contact with tiling by a clothed body would disappear more quickly than long contact with a carpet by a naked body that was exuding bodily fluid would last much longer.
And? How does that excuse KMs disingenuous and scurrilous hatchet job on cadaver dogs? What possessed her to do it in the first place? She is wrong so why?
What exactly is incorrect about what she said?
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 27, 2013, 10:48:22 PM
To go back to my OP, apart from the fact that no one can prove cadaver scent lasts no longer than a month, in fact studies prove it DOES,can anyone who can copy and paste from KMs book post her paragraph on Zapata and the dogs, telling how they are reliable only 20-40% of the time and saying after a few hours or so after body parts were removed in some test, and that three months later would be even worse? thanks in advance
(http://i.imgur.com/LxYmime.jpg)
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Redblossom on May 27, 2013, 11:10:47 PM
Thank you John, a pile of....
http://www.csst.org/residual_scent.html
RESIDUAL SCENT IN BUILDINGS
One of the questions we are commonly asked as forensic canine handlers is "How long will scent last in any given situation?" This is a very complicated question, but we want to begin to unravel the secrets. We know some of the elements that will affect residual scent are heat/sun, wind, humidity and rain.
Our first project was conducted in a closed, unused building. Items were placed in different rooms for 5 hours and then removed.
What is Residual Scent? Residual is defined by Webster's dictionary as - leaving a residue remaining effective for some time. Within this paper we are using the term in conjunction with decomposing human scent. Residual scent searches are those conducted when no physical form is present. Residual scent is what is left when the decomposing item has been removed. It is something we cannot see and humans cannot necessarily smell.
Introduction This project began by accident, so was not preplanned as a residual scent research paper. We make no claims to having ruled out all variables, but are using this project to learn what the variables are and how to more effectively set up our next residual scent project.
Our goal in this paper is to look at residual scent in a closed, unused building and see if we can find out how long a trained cadaver / forensic evidence dog can locate the original scent location. All the dogs used in this project ranged from those with some basic training in the finding of cadaver scent to specialized trained dogs in forensic evidence / body recovery. We see this as just the beginning of ongoing residual scent undertakings.
On November 9, 1996 several items were placed in different areas of a building. The building used was built in the 1930's and was used as classrooms up until 1995. It is part of a large developmental hospital that was built before 1900. Most of the furniture is now gone. There is still human clothing around, chairs, desks, shelves with things on them, wardrobes, curtains, and boxes of books and general effects. The facility has been closed down and most of the buildings are scheduled to be demolished.
Room #11 was used as an activity or day room. It is a large open room. The scent sources were blood (3cc) left to dry on the floor and door in the room. Room #16 is a closet/storage room off room #11. The scent source was blood (approx. 1cc) on paper on the floor. Room #5 is a large storage room with closets and shelves. The scent source was a soil sample with dried fluids from a gunshot to the head suicide enclosed in a 50ml vented container. The upper window has been open the whole time in this room. Room #18 is a large living room. Scent sources were; hair mixed with cadaver scent in the fireplace flue, and a very small amount of blood inside a trash can. Room #9 is a tiled utility area across the hall from a kitchen area. Scent source was hair and blood in a 50ml container placed in the foot of standing ironing board, so the sample was 5 feet off the ground.
Since the original set up date on November 9, 1996, we have returned to the building 4 times: January 8, 1997, April 2, 1997, July 23, 1997 and December 7, 1997. On our visit in April we found that they had removed most of the original furniture and some boxes of trash, so the building had little left in it. Two of the objects (the ironing board and a box of trash), that had held scent sources were now missing.
Results Each dog participating in this project was able to find most or all of the locations where the decomposing scent articles had been. We saw dogs, which varied, from full alert and pinpointing to general interest in the room or area.
What we have found so far is; residual scent will last 1 year in a building with minimum environmental influence, or human disturbance. Even after the objects where the scent source had been were removed, the dogs were able to locate the rooms, general area, or pinpoint where it had been.
Each time we have worked the problem we have included teams that had not worked the area before. We now have had 16 teams work the residual scent problem. The dogs have ranged from veteran cadaver trained certified teams to 1 year old puppies (who have been training from 8 weeks of age on cadaver and residual scent).
Observations We noticed that there was a big difference between teams that do mainly live person searching and teams that specialize in forensic evidence / body recovery searches. The general difference being, forensic evidence / body recovery dogs are searched slower, have been taught to do a fine search, check items for scent sources, and alert without seeing an object. Most live human search dogs are trained to keep looking until they find the person and then to alert. Younger and less experienced dogs had fewer problems and were willing to commit to an alert more readily than some of the mainly live human search dogs.
Questions, Variables, Problems, Future Ideas One of the questions that we have wondered about after observing dogs who have worked the problem prior is; do the dogs remember where items were previously placed or where they alerted before and how long do they remember?
Also, what effect does having an observer that is knowledgeable of all the locations have on the team? Can the handler and or dog read body language that gives them information as to where they should look or alert?
Plans for our next visit include having first time teams work the building by themselves without an observer on deck. The handler will then report any alerts or interest to the observer by showing them on a diagram of the building. This way the handler will have to commit to what the dog has done without any input from the observer. The observer will not be able to influence the team while they are searching.
No food reward will be allowed in the building.
Our next residual scent projects will employ measurable scent items. Example: 3cc of blood mixed with 2oz of human hair, or a specific human bone. This way we can control and repeat the scent items more closely in different conditions.
Room with the blood (3cc) is not a true residual scent problem, as we have defined it, because the blood has been left on the floor and door. But we now have data on how long dogs can locate dried blood.
Our next step in studying residual scent is to set up problems in different environments. We want to compare our results with problems set up in open areas, areas with sun and shade and no building to protect the scent.
Room #11 - dried blood - dogs able to show dried blood on door and floor
Room #5 - soil with dried fluids - dog showing inside closet where source had been
Room #18 - Hair with scent - all dogs indicated flue area of chimney where source had been
Room #18 - area where trash can had been - dogs all indicated area and showed pile of curtains now on floor but had been hanging above trash can originally. Curtains are porous and holding scent.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: debunker on May 27, 2013, 11:14:04 PM
There is nothing in that post that supports what you have been saying.
Title: Re: The dreaded cadaver scent
Post by: Redblossom on May 27, 2013, 11:15:37 PM
The reporting is confusing, this report says they thnk its been there for months rather than years, Suzanne was last seen over three years ago? It might not be her
The reporting is confusing, this report says they thnk its been there for months rather than years, Suzanne was last seen over three years ago? It might not be her