UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Robittybob1 on March 09, 2018, 05:46:18 PM
-
There is an apparent contradiction as to where the positive alert occurred. I am now aware that when Grimes talks of alert by Eddie on CC this was supposed to have occurred in the place where the clothes were examined, but we generally think this occurred at the villa, but Grimes is quoted this did not happen at the villa. I don't have the quotes for this on hand but I will provide them as soon as I can.
88
-
"4 - In the "Vista do Mar" villa, the house that was rented by the McCanns after leaving the Ocean's Club, the dog "marked" the area of a wardrobe that contained inside the soft toy that belonged to Madeleine McCann (cf. page 2099 and/or annex 88);"
Who wrote that? it is in the Archiving letter "4592 to 4649 Letter to the Attorney General regarding investigation details" So I assume written by a Portuguese official.
Was that sentence meant to imply CC was the source of the alert? It is anyone's guess IMO.
-
"6. The clothes and belongings of the McCann family
- Cadaver odour dog
* on two pieces of clothing belonging to Kate Healy.
* On a piece of clothing belonging to Madeleine.
* Possibly, on a soft toy belonging to Madeleine (cadaver odour was detected when the toy was still in the residence (on the date it was occupied by the family)).
* Signalling was confirmed in a scenario outside the villa."
Was the signalling on CC confirmed "in a scenario outside the villa"?
Confirmed to me it was repeated.
"confirm
verb
verb: confirm; 3rd person present: confirms; past tense: confirmed; past participle: confirmed; gerund or present participle: confirming
1.
establish the truth or correctness of (something previously believed or suspected to be the case).
"if these fears are confirmed, the outlook for the economy will be dire"
state with assurance that a report or fact is true.
"he confirmed that the general was in the hands of the rebels"
synonyms: affirm, reaffirm, assert, reassert, give an assurance, assure someone, repeat, say again, state again, pledge, promise, guarantee
"he confirmed that engineers would examine the road"
antonyms: deny
reinforce someone in (an opinion or feeling).
"he fuelled his misogyny by cultivating women who confirmed him in this view"
synonyms: corroborate, bear out, verify, show the truth of, prove, validate, authenticate, substantiate, give substance to, justify, vouch for, vindicate, give credence to, support, uphold, back up
"written records confirm the archaeological evidence"
antonyms: contradict, repudiate
make (a provisional arrangement or appointment) definite.
"Mr Baker's assistant telephoned to confirm his appointment with the chairman"
make (a decision or an agreement) formally valid.
"the organization has confirmed the appointment of Mr Collins as managing director"
synonyms: ratify, validate, sanction, endorse, formalize, certify, underwrite, authorize, warrant, accredit, approve, recognize, agree to, consent to, accept
"his appointment as ambassador was confirmed by the President"
antonyms: revoke
declare (someone) formally to be appointed to a particular post.
"he was confirmed as the new EC peace envoy"
Source: 3948 to 3964 - Intercalary Report by Inspector Joao Carlos 31-01-2008
-
G-unit gave us some references to check: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9213.msg450571#msg450571
"Cuddlecat was taken from the McCann's villa with the clothes and other items. Whether either or both dogs alerted to it isn't recorded, but it was returned to the McCanns on 3rd along with the other items taken. Gerry signed for them.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P8/08_VOLUME_VIIIa_Page_2125.jpg
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CLOTHES.htm "
-
Davel: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9213.msg450574#msg450574
"Grime confirmed eddie signalled CC in his rogatory"
OK let's look at what he says:
"'Can you confirm if the signal given regarding the stuffed toy corresponds to a concrete alert of detection of a cadaver, or a mere trick played by the dog''
The dogs were not taught any 'tricks'. EVRD 'signalled' the toy, which at my request was retained by the Judicial Police for future forensic analysis. I have no knowledge of the results of any forensic analysis on the toy."
OK it doesn't say where this alert occurs. We are trying to work out where the signalling occurred.
-
Davel: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9213.msg450574#msg450574
"Grime confirmed eddie signalled CC in his rogatory"
OK let's look at what he says:
"'Can you confirm if the signal given regarding the stuffed toy corresponds to a concrete alert of detection of a cadaver, or a mere trick played by the dog''
The dogs were not taught any 'tricks'. EVRD 'signalled' the toy, which at my request was retained by the Judicial Police for future forensic analysis. I have no knowledge of the results of any forensic analysis on the toy."
OK it doesn't say where this alert occurs. We are trying to work out where the signalling occurred.
its on video in the apartment
-
G-unit gave us some references to check: http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9213.msg450571#msg450571
"Cuddlecat was taken from the McCann's villa with the clothes and other items. Whether either or both dogs alerted to it isn't recorded, but it was returned to the McCanns on 3rd along with the other items taken. Gerry signed for them.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P8/08_VOLUME_VIIIa_Page_2125.jpg
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CLOTHES.htm "
How did you work out whether the signature is for the picking up or return of these items?
Either way CC was boxed along with the other items but is there video footage of CC being confirmed as an alert along with the clothes?
-
How did you work out whether the signature is for the picking up or return of these items?
Either way CC was boxed along with the other items but is there video footage of CC being confirmed as an alert along with the clothes?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1617.0
-
its on video in the apartment
I disputed that on a previous thread. IMO Eddie did not alert to CC in the Villa, he plays with it in the lounge, and does not bark. Is that a signal even though there was no barking?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1617.0
He barks at the sideboard but there is no proof CC was inside the sideboard at that time. We had just seen CC lying on the floor, and later he is in the cupboard. How and when did it get from one place to the other?
-
I disputed that on a previous thread. IMO Eddie did not alert to CC in the Villa, he plays with it in the lounge, and does not bark. Is that a signal even though there was no barking?
He barks at the sideboard but there is no proof CC was inside the sideboard at that time. We had just seen CC lying on the floor, and later he is in the cupboard. How and when did it get from one place to the other?
You can see grime pick CC out of the cupboard...eddie ignores CC several times...according to Grime this is an alert...and he is supposed to be the expert...thats ONE of the things that makes me think the alerts are not the exact science some imagine they are
-
You can see grime pick CC out of the cupboard...eddie ignores CC several times...according to Grime this is an alert...and he is supposed to be the expert...thats ONE of the things that makes me think the alerts are not the exact science some imagine they are
Eddie alerted at the sideboard and behind the table for some reason, but there is no proof CC was any where near there at the time of those two sessions of barking.
-
Eddie alerted at the sideboard and behind the table for some reason, but there is no proof CC was any where near there at the time of those two sessions of barking.
The major giveaway is Grime first going to open the far cupboard door.
Eddie sniffed at the table before barking beside the chair. Unfortunately, we cannot see if anything was on the chair or under the pillow on the table.
-
"- OBJECTS FOR EXAMINATION
1. One (01) pink cloth toy, with yellow paws and ears and blue label, make "cuddle cat", with a third in wood and a green band, alluding to Fatima, that was found in the lounge on top of a large chair [armchair]."
2097 to 2098 Result of search at McCann rental villa 2007.08.02
2099 to 2109 Information regarding various inspection sites with photographic report
TRANSLATED BY ALBYM
08 -PROCESSO 8 PAGES 2098 TO 2109
What does that mean - "found"? Was that before or after it had been moved to different parts of the villa?
-
- 18h36 - the dog Eddy, that detects cadaver odour, 'marked' [alerted in] the area of a cupboard in the lounge, it being confirmed that the dog indicated a pink soft toy belonging to Madeleine Beth McCann.
from:
2097 to 2098 Result of search at McCann rental villa 2007.08.02
2099 to 2109 Information regarding various inspection sites with photographic report
TRANSLATED BY ALBYM
08 -PROCESSO 8 PAGES 2098 TO 2109
That looked more like the dining room to me.
EDDIE & KEELA REPORT
"6.36pm - The dog Eddie, who detects cadaver odours, "marked" the area of a cupboard in the living room. On checking, the dog was indicating a pink soft toy belonging to Madeleine McCann. "
Now it is the living room.
-
Eddie & Keela Martin Grime Report http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
"CANINE SEARCH OF MR McCANN'S VILLA, PRESENT OCCUPANCY.
The villa interior, garden, and all property within were searched by the EVRD.
The only alert indication given was when the dog located a pink cuddly toy in
the villas lounge. The CSI dog did not alert to the toy when screened
separately.
It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to cadaver scent
contamination. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this
alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence."
So is that Martin saying the alert was when it was in the lounge when he found it in the toy bin (picks it up and carries it but doesn't bark). No mention of the test in the sideboard.
"* Can you say whether the indication given to the cuddly toy corresponds to a concrete alert to dead body scent or to a mere dog playing trick ?" 21 to 25 Witness statement of Martin Grime 2008.05.14
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
-
Does Martin Grime not say anything specific about the two episodes of barking in the dining room?
-
Looking critically at the video https://youtu.be/_qG21K6XJRg
we get two different views of the sideboard door. From measurements of the opening between the two views the cupboard door is more open on the second view.
First view is when the alert occurs.
Second view is when CC is found.
Conclusion:
Cuddle cat had been placed in the sideboard cupboard between first view and second view.
You can really see it by the gap that develops as the bi-fold door opens Vertical gap very much more noticeable in the second photo.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Calculations to prove door is more open:
80 50 94.33981132 700 7.41998516 Second Photo
67 30 73.40980861 688 9.372044595 First photo
aspect ratios of 7.4 and 9.4 were measured (Aspect ratio = height of door in pixels/gap behind door.)
To measure the jap in pixels I use the Pythagoras theorem a^2 + b^2 = C^2 so the door with the biggest gap had the largest rectangle (80X50) = giving a hypotenuse of 94.3 pixels.
To make sure the size of the gap is not just from being closer to the door I look at the apparent height of the door. So the second photo was slightly closer 700:688 but very minor difference. compared to the changes in the length of the hypotenuse.
-
Looking critically at the video https://youtu.be/_qG21K6XJRg
we get two different views of the sideboard door. From measurements of the opening between the two views the cupboard door is more open on the second view.
First view is when the alert occurs.
Second view is when CC is found.
Conclusion:
Cuddle cat had been placed in the sideboard cupboard between first view and second view.
You can really see it by the gap that develops as the bi-fold door opens Vertical gap very much more noticeable in the second photo.
Looking at your two photos above, Rob, which I am unable technically to reproduce, I notice that the camera position is different for each photo.
You may well be correct with your hypothesis, Rob, but with different camera positions it is unfortunately not possible to tell IMO. Move the camera a little and the view changes.
Some egg head like Alice might be able to work it out, but I am doubtful with no datum information to work from.
You have put such a lot of time and effort into working this out, I feel mean telling you.
But anyhow, IMO, Eddie alerted to the pile of folders on the counter and not CuddleCat at all. I wonder especially where the loose piece of paper on the very top of the pile came from. Did that have the smell of cooked pork on it? Bacon sarnies for breakfast? Eddie was trained on dead piglets.
Worse still had it been deliberately impregnated with the smell of cadavarine?
But who would do that?
-
Had they opened the door when Eddie alerted and we saw CC in the sideboard then their argument would have been better. But they left the area and then they returned , the doors look as if they have been moved, and the cupboard is open and CC is in there. I'm not convinced as I see Eddie go past the open cupboard and did not alert. But as you say when he was reaching up to the pile of folders that is when he reacts.
-
First opening https://youtu.be/_qG21K6XJRg?t=278
Second opening https://youtu.be/_qG21K6XJRg?t=337 He opens the middle bi-fold door first gets a glimpse of where CC is and then opens up the first bi-fold door.
Sadie do you set you video speed to 25% before watching this so you can stop it where it is best?
Bottom row of video look for the gear wheel (settings) select, then select "speed" the arrowhead and click on 25%. THE VIDEO WILL NOW SLOW RIGHT DOWN.
-
Looking at your two photos above, Rob, which I am unable technically to reproduce, I notice that the camera position is different for each photo.
You may well be correct with your hypothesis, Rob, but with different camera positions it is unfortunately not possible to tell IMO. Move the camera a little and the view changes.
Some egg head like Alice might be able to work it out, but I am doubtful with no datum information to work from.
You have put such a lot of time and effort into working this out, I feel mean telling you.
But anyhow, IMO, Eddie alerted to the pile of folders on the counter and not CuddleCat at all. I wonder especially where the loose piece of paper on the very top of the pile came from. Did that have the smell of cooked pork on it? Bacon sarnies for breakfast? Eddie was trained on dead piglets.
Worse still had it been deliberately impregnated with the smell of cadavarine?
But who would do that?
Martin Grime is an expert dog trainer and handler. It's a bit pathetic in my opinion when people try to suggest they know better than he does what his dog alerted to.
The McCanns and their lawyers tried to discredit Eddie by pointing to one U.S. judge's comments and suggesting that cadaver dogs are 'incredibly unreliable' when tested scientifically.
Perhaps they didn't realise that Eddie was independently scientifically tested at regular intervals and had an exemplary record, as did Grime. Other dogs may have been found to be unreliable, but Eddie never was.
Those who support the McCanns have followed their lead but their efforts include more fantasies than facts in my opinion. Only the truly desperate would make some of the ridiculous suggestions I have seen imo.
Not only do people quote studies showing other dogs being 'unreliable', they argue that Eddie didn't alert to the scent he was trained to detect.
I can only conclude that Eddie's alerts are seen as a threat. Otherwise why expend so much energy and imagination trying to suggest that he was wrong?
-
Martin Grime is an expert dog trainer and handler. It's a bit pathetic in my opinion when people try to suggest they know better than he does what his dog alerted to.
The McCanns and their lawyers tried to discredit Eddie by pointing to one U.S. judge's comments and suggesting that cadaver dogs are 'incredibly unreliable' when tested scientifically.
Perhaps they didn't realise that Eddie was independently scientifically tested at regular intervals and had an exemplary record, as did Grime. Other dogs may have been found to be unreliable, but Eddie never was.
Those who support the McCanns have followed their lead but their efforts include more fantasies than facts in my opinion. Only the truly desperate would make some of the ridiculous suggestions I have seen imo.
Not only do people quote studies showing other dogs being 'unreliable', they argue that Eddie didn't alert to the scent he was trained to detect.
I can only conclude that Eddie's alerts are seen as a threat. Otherwise why expend so much energy and imagination trying to suggest that he was wrong?
The reason for posting is to dispel the myths... Surely it's the truth that's important.. I have never criticised Grime
Do you have a cite fir scientific testing of Eddie.. I read evidence of ytraining was anectdotal not scientific..
You have shown your misunderstanding of what grime said on another thread...
Grime has never confirmed the alerts, were to cadaver odour... They have no evidential reliability... You need to accept that
-
Martin Grime is an expert dog trainer and handler. It's a bit pathetic in my opinion when people try to suggest they know better than he does what his dog alerted to.
The McCanns and their lawyers tried to discredit Eddie by pointing to one U.S. judge's comments and suggesting that cadaver dogs are 'incredibly unreliable' when tested scientifically.
Perhaps they didn't realise that Eddie was independently scientifically tested at regular intervals and had an exemplary record, as did Grime. Other dogs may have been found to be unreliable, but Eddie never was.
Those who support the McCanns have followed their lead but their efforts include more fantasies than facts in my opinion. Only the truly desperate would make some of the ridiculous suggestions I have seen imo.
Not only do people quote studies showing other dogs being 'unreliable', they argue that Eddie didn't alert to the scent he was trained to detect.
I can only conclude that Eddie's alerts are seen as a threat. Otherwise why expend so much energy and imagination trying to suggest that he was wrong?
Cite for independent scientific testing... Otherwise it appears you are making things up as you go along
And cite fir Eddie alerted to what he was trained for
-
Martin Grime is an expert dog trainer and handler. It's a bit pathetic in my opinion when people try to suggest they know better than he does what his dog alerted to.
snip ...
I can only conclude that Eddie's alerts are seen as a threat. Otherwise why expend so much energy and imagination trying to suggest that he was wrong?
Can you show me any statement from Martin Grime that talks of the alert to CC in the dining room?
-
The reason for posting is to dispel the myths...
Isn't there a specific site for that,or is it failing.
-
Isn't there a specific site for that,or is it failing.
I prefer to post here where I can answer questions direct and help people understand the facts
-
Isn't there a specific site for that,or is it failing.
I dint see the point in posting on a site that only allows one viewpoint
-
I prefer to post here where I can answer questions direct and help people understand the facts
Best leave that to the real experts,SY and the PJ.
-
The reason for posting is to dispel the myths... Surely it's the truth that's important.. I have never criticised Grime
Do you have a cite fir scientific testing of Eddie.. I read evidence of ytraining was anectdotal not scientific..
You have shown your misunderstanding of what grime said on another thread...
Grime has never confirmed the alerts, were to cadaver odour... They have no evidential reliability... You need to accept that
I think it is more to create another myth of the unreliable search dog.
-
Best leave that to the real experts,SY and the PJ.
It is going to be interesting to see what documents are released when the case is archived for the second time.
-
I think it is more to create another myth of the unreliable search dog.
Then you think wrong... The dog is reliable as a search dog as most understand... If there are remains the dog will find it
The problem arises with so called remnant scent.
In that instance grime is unable to confirm the alerts... And tells us they are unreliable as evidence
-
It is going to be interesting to see what documents are released when the case is archived for the second time.
Don't see that happening some how.
-
I think it is more to create another myth of the unreliable search dog.
what we have also seen is G unit who is regarded by some as an expert on the case ...make claims re the dogs taht she cannot substantiate...one of which is totally untrue..hence the myths being perpetuated...
G posted..
Given that Grime's opinion was that these alerts were triggered by cadaver scent
-
what we have also seen is G unit who is regarded by some as an expert on the case ...make claims re the dogs taht she cannot substantiate...one of which is totally untrue..hence the myths being perpetuated...
G posted..
Given that Grime's opinion was that these alerts were triggered by cadaver scent
I think we all know taht is untrue
...and you and others are creating myths about the dogs.
-
...and you and others are creating myths about the dogs.
you will now need to give a cite where I have created a myth or remove your post...your claim is total rubbish re myself
-
you will now need to give a cite where I have created a myth or remove your post...your claim is total rubbish re myself
Fine, so you accept that the dogs were professionally handled, most likely alerted to what the trained to alert to, were not directed to alert falsely and were not tired. If you don’t accept that you are creating myths I.e. unsubstantiated narratives to caste doubt on an element of the case.
-
Fine, so you accept that the dogs were professionally handled, most likely alerted to what the trained to alert to, were not directed to alert falsely and were not tired. If you don’t accept that you are creating myths I.e. unsubstantiated narratives to caste doubt on an element of the case.
Grime has not told us what the dogs alerted to... So most likely is an assumption..
I have never said the dogs were directed to alert falsely
...so you need to withdraw, your false claim
-
...and you and others are creating myths about the dogs.
A cite for where I have created a myth... Otherwise you need to remove your claim
I have been quite meticulous in my posts Re the dogs... Always providing cites... G unit on the sceptic side has made several innaccurate posts recently and failed to provide cites...
-
It is going to be interesting to see what documents are released when the case is archived for the second time.
From your comment I take it that you don't think the case will be solved.
OG will disclose nothing. That is the way of British police, so nothing to see there.
Portugal may be rather more circumspect a second time around and restrict access to the general public.
-
The reason for posting is to dispel the myths... Surely it's the truth that's important.. I have never criticised Grime
Do you have a cite fir scientific testing of Eddie.. I read evidence of ytraining was anectdotal not scientific..
You have shown your misunderstanding of what grime said on another thread...
Grime has never confirmed the alerts, were to cadaver odour... They have no evidential reliability... You need to accept that
Your reason for posting may be to dispel what you see as myths. Others, in my opinion, are creating myths about about bacon sandwiches and fertilizer. You may be interested in truth, they seem more interested in starting rumours which have no truthful underpinnings.
Scientific testing;
"samples being taken by remote means on sterile gauze pads. The gauze pads are then 'screened' in a line - up formation with the inclusion of a number of control samples and blank sterile pads."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
I have misunderstood nothing. Grime gave his professional opinion about what Eddie was alerting to. Just his opinion, but an expert opinion has value.
-
what we have also seen is G unit who is regarded by some as an expert on the case ...make claims re the dogs taht she cannot substantiate...one of which is totally untrue..hence the myths being perpetuated...
G posted..
Given that Grime's opinion was that these alerts were triggered by cadaver scent
My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
-
Your reason for posting may be to dispel what you see as myths. Others, in my opinion, are creating myths about about bacon sandwiches and fertilizer. You may be interested in truth, they seem more interested in starting rumours which have no truthful underpinnings.
Scientific testing;
"samples being taken by remote means on sterile gauze pads. The gauze pads are then 'screened' in a line - up formation with the inclusion of a number of control samples and blank sterile pads."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
I have misunderstood nothing. Grime gave his professional opinion about what Eddie was alerting to. Just his opinion, but an expert opinion has value.
You have misunderstood his opinion.. He states the alerts are suggestive of cadaver odour not are cadaver odour...
You said independent scientific testing... What you have quoted IS NOT... who does the testing?
Scent on a couple of gauze pads is NOT scientific testing
I'm happy with Grimes expert opinion... The alerts have no evidential value
-
My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
Read it again.. Grimes opinion is that his opinion is that it is suggestive the alerts were triggered by cadaver scent... Not that they were
Proof again you do not understand the evidence even when it's in front of you
-
Read it again.. Grimes opinion is that his opinion is that it is suggestive the alerts were triggered by cadaver scent... Not that they were
Proof again you do not understand the evidence even when it's in front of you
Getting on toward 11 yrs it seems enough to vex thee though.
-
My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
Ok shall we all accept that the EVRD's alert indications are suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant?
Suggestive but not proven, not proven who, what happened or when.
-
Getting on toward 11 yrs it seems enough to vex thee though.
Doesn't vex me at al I enjoy pointing out where posters have strong opinions are based on things, that are untrue.... I enjoy proving those who contradict me wrong
-
You have misunderstood his opinion.. He states the alerts are suggestive of cadaver odour not are cadaver odour...
You said independent scientific testing... What you have quoted IS NOT... who does the testing?
Scent on a couple of gauze pads is NOT scientific testing
I'm happy with Grimes expert opinion... The alerts have no evidential value
Suggestive means? Indicative, signifying, giving an inkling.
If control samples are included with no scent on them that is using scientific methodology.
You missed out the caveat;
no evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
unless means 'except if'.
-
Ok shall we all accept that the EVRD's alert indications are suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant?
Suggestive but not proven, not proven who, what happened or when.
What we are discussing is the false claims, Re grimes opinion... In his, statement grime says it's possible the dog alerted to cadaver... Just possible... Yet G wants to claim his opinion is that they did
-
I think it is more to create another myth of the unreliable search dog.
In my opinion on his visit to Haute de la Garenne Eddie proved that he can indeed find items that his training encompassed.- blood and or semen
- very old bones
- location of scattered remains from a cremation
- JAR/6
What it is impossible for him to find in a search area is something which was never there in the first place; for example in the footage from Luz we saw him take an interest in an item from kitchen refuse and a key fob but neither there or in Haute de la Garenne did he find evidence to support the theories which brought him to those locations.
-
Suggestive means? Indicative, signifying, giving an inkling.
If control samples are included with no scent on them that is using scientific methodology.
You missed out the caveat;
no evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
unless means 'except if'.
I believe grime carries out the tests so they are not independent.... And the tests, are not scientific
And... If you try substituting.. If.. for unless you will find the sentence makes no sense at all
-
Doesn't vex me at al I enjoy pointing out where posters have strong opinions are based on things, that are untrue.... I enjoy proving those who contradict me wrong
The only person who thinks you've proved anyone wrong is you, in my opinion. Perhaps you should turn your attention to the real myth creators and dispel their fanciful suggestions about bacon sandwiches and pork chops?
-
What we are discussing is the false claims, Re grimes opinion... In his, statement grime says it's possible the dog alerted to cadaver... Just possible... Yet G wants to claim his opinion is that they did
No disrespect Davel to you or any one else,but look at the forum stats now,blue posters equal regular posters 1 hidden and maybe 20 guest's where once they were in the hundreds,people are tired of it all.
Granted theres nothing new but raking over old ground to score points doesn't show the forum at its best imo,maybe that's for a new thread.
-
The only person who thinks you've proved anyone wrong is you, in my opinion. Perhaps you should turn your attention to the real myth creators and dispel their fanciful suggestions about bacon sandwiches and pork chops?
you have claimed grime s opinion is that cavaer odour triggered the alert...Ive shown that is false
you claimed the tests were indeendent...false...scientific,...false
-
No disrespect Davel to you or any one else,but look at the forum stats now,blue posters equal regular posters 1 hidden and maybe 20 guest's where once they were in the hundreds,people are tired of it all.
Granted theres nothing new but raking over old ground to score points doesn't show the forum at its best imo,maybe that's for a new thread.
what are you suggesting...if peopel are tired hen they dont have to read and post...im not bothered...why are you still posting....
-
I believe grime carries out the tests so they are not independent.... And the tests, are not scientific
Haven't time to look for a cite at the moment ... but isn't Martin Grime on record when challenged that his dogs were no longer accredited either in Luz or Jersey that his training methods were far more frequent and stringent than required?
Morse for example had a proven independent track record without which indications from him would not have been considered by the courts in the USA ... so independent verifiable assessment is important.
-
Suggestive means? Indicative, signifying, giving an inkling.
If control samples are included with no scent on them that is using scientific methodology.
You missed out the caveat;
no evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm
unless means 'except if'.
So you are saying the same thing. There needs to be corroborating evidence.
If Madeleine's DNA was found on CC what would that mean? Is that corroborating evidence?
I am surprised that there was not more effort to locate the source of the alerts in the dining room. There appeared to me to be something on the bench. What could have been on the far side of the table?
-
what are you suggesting...if peopel are tired hen they dont have to read and post...im not bothered...why are you still posting....
Just expressing an opinion.
There are non so blind than those who will not see.
Try as I might I just can't see a admin or mod logo on your avatar.
-
This is a Discussion Forum where everyone has the right to an opinion, if phrased according to the rules.
Moderators also have the right to an opinion similarly expressed.
What colour is displayed is simply a mark of status. But someone has to decide if a comment is acceptable, according to the rules.
As it is, Moderators are very careful, as I know, and possibly some don't want to know.
There is a Report System which isn't often used by ordinary members, so I can only conclude that there isn't much dissension.
Moderators have to report everything they do, which then comes under the scrutiny of Admin. The system on this forum couldn't be much more fair.
-
So you are saying the same thing. There needs to be corroborating evidence.
If Madeleine's DNA was found on CC what would that mean? Is that corroborating evidence?
I am surprised that there was not more effort to locate the source of the alerts in the dining room. There appeared to me to be something on the bench. What could have been on the far side of the table?
I would have been amazed if Madeleine's DNA hadn't been on CC. She slept with the toy. Latterly I have no doubt canine DNA would have been found on it too.
Eddie did pick up evidence in his mouth before discarding it as being of no interest to him then walking past it ignoring it every time. In my opinion that was well outwith his training parameters as well as proving that whatever Eddie alerted to in the villa, it was not CC.
-
Just expressing an opinion.
There are non so blind than those who will not see.
Try as I might I just can't see a admin or mod logo on your avatar.
It has been a long time but it is still time to work it out IMO. Who had previously noted that the PJ and Martin Grime give different places for the alert on Cuddle Cat? Who else noted that CC had been moved but it was not established when, so there was no proof CC was the source of the alerts near the side board in the dining room?
-
It has been a long time but it is still time to work it out IMO. Who had previously noted that the PJ and Martin Grime give different places for the alert on Cuddle Cat? Who else noted that CC had been moved but it was not established when so there was no proof CC was the source of the alerts near the side board in the dining room?
Given that the real experts ie:SY and the PJ don't seem to be the least interested in this particular subject just what do you expect to be worked out?
-
What we are discussing is the false claims, Re grimes opinion... In his, statement grime says it's possible the dog alerted to cadaver... Just possible... Yet G wants to claim his opinion is that they did
He used the word suggestive, not possible. In my opinion changing a witness's words demonstrates that the poster isn't too concerned with accuracy.
A certain supporter website, when criticising the MMRG's leaflet made the same point about the word 'notoriously' was used instead of 'incredibly'.
I have quoted Grime's actual words, not my interpretation of them.
-
Given that the real experts ie:SY and the PJ don't seem to be the least interested in this particular subject just what do you expect to be worked out?
Well I'm working on developing a picture of what was going on. It is too early to say what I expect yet. I don't even know if anyone has really kept up with my thinking on the case as it would be hard to follow.
-
He used the word suggestive, not possible. In my opinion changing a witness's words demonstrates that the poster isn't too concerned with accuracy.
A certain supporter website, when criticising the MMRG's leaflet made the same point about the word 'notoriously' was used instead of 'incredibly'.
I have quoted Grime's actual words, not my interpretation of them.
MINISTERIO PUBLICO DE PORTIMAO
"It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to 'a cadaver scent'
contaminant. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this
alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence."
Martin Grime
I havent changed anything..as my CITE shows grime used the word possible in his witness statement...so it is grime who is changing the word...once again you have been proven wrong
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm#mg2473
-
A cite for where I have created a myth... Otherwise you need to remove your claim
I have been quite meticulous in my posts Re the dogs... Always providing cites... G unit on the sceptic side has made several innaccurate posts recently and failed to provide cites...
And cite for Eddie alerted to what he was trained for
And of course both Harrison and Grime have said that the uncomfirmed alerts are unreliable
For those who have followed the thread I've sent an email to see if I can get a copy of the review where the evidence Re the dogs was deemed unreliable
The evidence provided by the dog handler was deemed unreliable
The best cadaver dogs in the world...found nothing...even after being repeatedly called back
Cite for the dog alerts were the key piece of evidence ,,,,its just your opinion....and its my opinion that the alerts in the mccann case..based on common sense...the way the dogs were repeatedly called back...the testimony of grime and harrison...are unreliable in this case
I think that's, a pretty damning condemnation of the alerts.. Don't you
The review body however decided that the cafaver dog evidence was unreliable
Isn’t it about time sceptics faced the truth re the alerts
Etc etc etc
Myth making.
-
Myth making.
IN YOUR OPINION
Everything I have posted is true... as opposed to gunit where I have pointed out several things that are not true..
Could you post something I have posted Re the dogs that is not true... If not you need to remove your post... Posting facts is not myth making
-
You have misunderstood his opinion.. He states the alerts are suggestive of cadaver odour not are cadaver odour...
You said independent scientific testing... What you have quoted IS NOT... who does the testing?
Scent on a couple of gauze pads is NOT scientific testing
I'm happy with Grimes expert opinion... The alerts have no evidential value
Were he an expert witness in court he would not be allowed to express that opinion.
-
Were he an expert witness in court he would not be allowed to express that opinion.
The fact that he has stated it could be raised in court as evidence
-
MINISTERIO PUBLICO DE PORTIMAO
"It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to 'a cadaver scent'
contaminant. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this
alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence."
Martin Grime
I havent changed anything..as my CITE shows grime used the word possible in his witness statement...so it is grime who is changing the word...once again you have been proven wrong
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm#mg2473
It seems he said a few things, but I prefer the quote where he mentions his professional opinion although it's all his professional opinion really.
-
It might help if you provided links. Something else that the supporter site criticised the MMRG about.
It seems he said a few things, but I prefer the quote where he mentions his professional opinion although it's all his professional opinion really.
His professional opinion was that it was possible that the alerts were to cadaver....he also said they were suggestive at a a later date I believe...what he DOESN'T say is that the are to cadaver in his opinion...which is what you claimed
-
The fact that he has stated it could be raised in court as evidence
Explain presisely how then.
Including the bit where the judge will have given him a flea in his ear for trying to usurp the courts powers.
-
Explain presisely how then.
Including the bit where the judge will have given him a flea in his ear for trying to usurp the courts powers.
so you are suggesting grime desrves a flea in his ear...and harrison...they are both stating their opinion to the police so your claim makes no sense..
-
It has been a long time but it is still time to work it out IMO. Who had previously noted that the PJ and Martin Grime give different places for the alert on Cuddle Cat? Who else noted that CC had been moved but it was not established when so there was no proof CC was the source of the alerts near the side board in the dining room?
Sorry for not being interested in your CC thoughts, Rob. I just don't see the point in speculating about the how and why of it. The searches were directed and overseen by the two best experts the UK had, so anything amateurs have to say is irrelevant in my opinion.
-
Sorry for not being interested in your CC thoughts, Rob. I just don't see the point in speculating about the how and why of it. The searches were directed and overseen by the two best experts the UK had, so anything amateurs have to say is irrelevant in my opinion.
yet how many amateurs here criticise the experts at SY
-
so you are suggesting grime desrves a flea in his ear...and harrison...they are both stating their opinion to the police so your claim makes no sense..
In the context of what I have posted where either Mr Grime or Mr Harrison is in court as an expert witness it makes perfect sense.
It would seem you need to brush up on the duties of an expert witness.
-
The off-topic posts relating to moderation have been removed.
Members should note that the admin staff have the ultimate veto over any edited or removed posts. It doesn't happen very often but occasionally moderator decisions are overruled in what are usually seen as borderline reports.
-
"6. The clothes and belongings of the McCann family
- Cadaver odour dog
* on two pieces of clothing belonging to Kate Healy.
* On a piece of clothing belonging to Madeleine.
* Possibly, on a soft toy belonging to Madeleine (cadaver odour was detected when the toy was still in the residence (on the date it was occupied by the family)).
* Signalling was confirmed in a scenario outside the villa."
Was the signalling on CC confirmed "in a scenario outside the villa"?
Confirmed to me it was repeated.
"confirm
verb
verb: confirm; 3rd person present: confirms; past tense: confirmed; past participle: confirmed; gerund or present participle: confirming
1.
establish the truth or correctness of (something previously believed or suspected to be the case).
"if these fears are confirmed, the outlook for the economy will be dire"
state with assurance that a report or fact is true.
"he confirmed that the general was in the hands of the rebels"
synonyms: affirm, reaffirm, assert, reassert, give an assurance, assure someone, repeat, say again, state again, pledge, promise, guarantee
"he confirmed that engineers would examine the road"
antonyms: deny
reinforce someone in (an opinion or feeling).
"he fuelled his misogyny by cultivating women who confirmed him in this view"
synonyms: corroborate, bear out, verify, show the truth of, prove, validate, authenticate, substantiate, give substance to, justify, vouch for, vindicate, give credence to, support, uphold, back up
"written records confirm the archaeological evidence"
antonyms: contradict, repudiate
make (a provisional arrangement or appointment) definite.
"Mr Baker's assistant telephoned to confirm his appointment with the chairman"
make (a decision or an agreement) formally valid.
"the organization has confirmed the appointment of Mr Collins as managing director"
synonyms: ratify, validate, sanction, endorse, formalize, certify, underwrite, authorize, warrant, accredit, approve, recognize, agree to, consent to, accept
"his appointment as ambassador was confirmed by the President"
antonyms: revoke
declare (someone) formally to be appointed to a particular post.
"he was confirmed as the new EC peace envoy"
Source: 3948 to 3964 - Intercalary Report by Inspector Joao Carlos 31-01-2008
Did this happen? "* Signalling was confirmed in a scenario outside the villa." for Cuddle Cat?
-
There is an apparent contradiction as to where the positive alert occurred. I am now aware that when Grimes talks of alert by Eddie on CC this was supposed to have occurred in the place where the clothes were examined, but we generally think this occurred at the villa, but Grimes is quoted this did not happen at the villa. I don't have the quotes for this on hand but I will provide them as soon as I can.
Show me which frame on the video is where Eddie is alerting to CC - I bet you can't.
-
IMO There is nowhere on the video where Eddie alerts to CC.
-
IMO There is nowhere on the video where Eddie alerts to CC.
Bit like that film Basic Instinct, where Sharon Stone uncrosses her legs - there's nothing to see there either. @)(++(*
-
Bit like that film Basic Instinct, where Sharon Stone uncrosses her legs - there's nothing to see there either. @)(++(*
Now honestly, did you specifically look?
-
Now honestly, did you specifically look?
It was like looking for the holy grail.
-
Now honestly, did you specifically look?
Too right I did - on slow motion as well.
-
It was like looking for the holy grail.
Seek.
-
Bit like that film Basic Instinct, where Sharon Stone uncrosses her legs - there's nothing to see there either. @)(++(*
Yes but the thought of what is there has a response eh?
Washing the little toy after carrying it around. In the Uk that would NOT have been allowed that would have been in a plastic bag and sent to forensics.
-
Yes but the thought of what is there has a response eh?
Washing the little toy after carrying it around. In the Uk that would NOT have been allowed that would have been in a plastic bag and sent to forensics.
What would it be tested for?
Would the testing destroy it?
-
What would it be tested for?
Would the testing destroy it?
Tested for anything... hair, blood, dead skin- anything
-
IMO There is nowhere on the video where Eddie alerts to CC.
The only suggestion I can make about the Cuddle Cat claim is that Eddie alerted to it off camera before the footage was taken which we all have seen. If that is the case it is unfortunate.
-
What would it be tested for?
Would the testing destroy it?
I imagine that if he had been dunked in bleach and put through the washer several times, he would be indestructible.
-
The only suggestion I can make about the Cuddle Cat claim is that Eddie alerted to it off camera before the footage was taken which we all have seen. If that is the case it is unfortunate.
Grime was asked in his, rog if it was, a genuine alert to cadaver and he didn't really answer the question
-
The only suggestion I can make about the Cuddle Cat claim is that Eddie alerted to it off camera before the footage was taken which we all have seen. If that is the case it is unfortunate.
If Eddie had already alerted to CC off-camera, then imo when Eddie was seen to alert beside the chair in the dining area (a blind testing) it indicates that Grime's production of CC from the sideboard was a ruse.
-
If Eddie had already alerted to CC off-camera, then imo when Eddie was seen to alert beside the chair in the dining area (a blind testing) it indicates that Grime's production of CC from the sideboard was a ruse.
Martin Grime Report
CANINE SEARCH OF MR McCANN'S VILLA, PRESENT OCCUPANCY.
The villa interior, garden, and all property within were searched by the EVRD.
The only alert indication given was when the dog located a pink cuddly toy in
the villas lounge. The CSI dog did not alert to the toy when screened
separately.
It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to cadaver scent
contamination. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this
alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.
-
Martin Grime Report
So now grime uses the word... Possible.... That's all... So how much confidence does grime have in the reliability of the alerts... IMO... Not much
-
So now grime uses the word... Possible.... That's all... So how much confidence does grime have in the reliability of the alerts... IMO... Not much
This thread is about the alert not the meaning of the alert. Grime said the dog alerted to the toy. Anyone doubting that is going against his legal statement.
-
This thread is about the alert not the meaning of the alert. Grime said the dog alerted to the toy. Anyone doubting that is going against his legal statement.
If you read my post again you will see I didn't question if the alert happened or not...
-
If you read my post again you will see I didn't question if the alert happened or not...
So you were off topic and possibly diverting?
-
So you were off topic and possibly diverting?
If you like...
-
Grime was asked in his, rog if it was, a genuine alert to cadaver and he didn't really answer the question
The question it self may be the reason for the rather tetchy reply imo.
'Can you confirm if the signal given regarding the stuffed toy corresponds to a concrete alert of detection of a cadaver, or a mere trick played by the dog''
The dogs were not taught any 'tricks'. EVRD 'signalled' the toy, which at my request was retained by the Judicial Police for future forensic analysis. I have no knowledge of the results of any forensic analysis on the toy.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
-
So now grime uses the word... Possible.... That's all... So how much confidence does grime have in the reliability of the alerts... IMO... Not much
Anything can be possible.
So seems he has a lot of confidence in the alerts.
-
The question it self may be the reason for the rather tetchy reply imo.
'Can you confirm if the signal given regarding the stuffed toy corresponds to a concrete alert of detection of a cadaver, or a mere trick played by the dog''
The dogs were not taught any 'tricks'. EVRD 'signalled' the toy, which at my request was retained by the Judicial Police for future forensic analysis. I have no knowledge of the results of any forensic analysis on the toy.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm
It was, a tetchy reply... And he didn't answer the, question
-
Anything can be possible.
So seems he has a lot of confidence in the alerts.
Not to me it doesn't... Possible does not imply any degree of certainty
-
Martin Grime Report
"CANINE SEARCH OF MR McCANN'S VILLA, PRESENT OCCUPANCY.
The villa interior, garden, and all property within were searched by the EVRD.
The only alert indication given was when the dog located a pink cuddly toy in
the villas lounge. The CSI dog did not alert to the toy when screened
separately.
....."
The problem I have is determining where is the lounge? Was it where Eddie left CC on the floor (lounge IMO) or where he barked near to what appears to be a dining table (dining room IMO)?
In the lounge Eddie located CC but didn't bark, but I notice Grime doesn't mention barking, yet in the other room Eddie barks but nowhere near to where CC is in the sideboard.
-
Not to me it doesn't... Possible does not imply any degree of certainty
It would have been better had he used a term of certainty e.g 80% certain or even 99.9% if he was really certain.
-
Martin Grime Report
Eddie alerted TWICE in the dining area whilst on camera, the result of which was the production of CC from a distant cupboard.
-
Eddie alerted TWICE in the dining area whilst on camera, the result of which was the production of CC from a distant cupboard.
So are you saying there was no alert to CC contrary to Grime’s statement?
-
It would have been better had he used a term of certainty e.g 80% certain or even 99.9% if he was really certain.
One has to wonder why he didn't... But I have my ideas
-
So are you saying there was no alert to CC contrary to Grime’s statement?
Unless there is an alert we can't see, then yes. If there was another alert not filmed, then why is there no mention in Grime's report of the 2 we can hear in the video to something in the dining area?
-
Unless there is an alert we can't see, then yes. If there was another alert not filmed, then why is there no mention in Grime's report of the 2 we can hear in the video to something in the dining area?
Maybe it’s because you’re not the dog handler and can’t identify when the dog alerts?
-
So are you saying there was no alert to CC contrary to Grime’s statement?
What is an alert and where did it happen?
-
Maybe it’s because you’re not the dog handler and can’t identify when the dog alerts?
I thought the dog barked when it alerted? It doesn’t take a dog handler to know when a dog has barked.
-
So Eddie was brought... At great expense... With a world class record in cadaver detection. I bet the PJ couldn't wait to have this incredible tool at their disposal... They waited with baited breath... Incredibly rddie alerted to CC... But they didn't bother to do any forensic tests... What's going on
-
So Eddie was brought... At great expense... With a world class record in cadaver detection. I bet the PJ couldn't wait to have this incredible tool at their disposal... They waited with baited breath... Incredibly rddie alerted to CC... But they didn't bother to do any forensic tests... What's going on
Have you just clicked onto this joke?
-
Maybe it’s because you’re not the dog handler and can’t identify when the dog alerts?
Perhaps you would explain, for the benefit of this ignoramus, the difference between Eddie's alert beside the wardrobe in 5A & the one beside the chair in the villa?
-
Perhaps you would explain, for the benefit of this ignoramus, the difference between Eddie's alert beside the wardrobe in 5A & the one beside the chair in the villa?
I’m not a dog handler either, would you like to go and check the FSS got their forensics right?
-
I’m not a dog handler either, would you like to go and check the FSS got their forensics right?
Are you suggesting they didnt
-
Are you suggesting they didnt
I’m suggesting that our opinions on the FSS are as relevant as our opinions on Grime.
-
I’m not a dog handler either, would you like to go and check the FSS got their forensics right?
Forensic science does not rely on the interpretation of a vocal alert made by a dog trained primarily on pig; it's a little more complicated than that. I can, however, see no distinction, visual or aural, between the 2 alerts I mentioned in my previous post.
-
I’m suggesting that our opinions on the FSS are as relevant as our opinions on Grime.
Absolutely not IMO.... DNA has tons of science supporting it... Grime has no real scientific evidence to support his alerts
-
I’m suggesting that our opinions on the FSS are as relevant as our opinions on Grime.
Are you suggesting that as far as Gime and his dogs are concerned we should just accept everything he says or his dogs suggest without question?
-
Are you suggesting that as far as Gime and his dogs are concerned we should just accept everything he says or his dogs suggest without question?
Google
Poacher martin grime
Poacher claimed to be a dog handler who knew grime and makes some interesting points... And grime doesn't seem to have sued him
-
Google
Poacher martin grime
Poacher claimed to be a dog handler who knew grime and makes some interesting points... And grime doesn't seem to have sued him
Poacher is an anonymous denizen of the internet.
-
Poacher is an anonymous denizen of the internet.
Everything he says makes, sense and adds up
-
Everything he says makes, sense and adds up
It would to you, casts baseless doubt on Grime’s work.
-
It would to you, casts baseless doubt on Grime’s work.
There's a lot if detail there.... And he answers several things that I have thought about...
-
There's a lot if detail there.... And he answers several things that I have thought about...
Even in a court Martin Grime would be cross examined or questioned.
-
There's a lot if detail there.... And he answers several things that I have thought about...
I'm not exactly sure that 'Poacher' is as anonymous as people think he is. I believe I know who he is and I believe I know his ranking in the police force having come across a lengthy post about him containing a post by him in a place on the internet where you would least expect it to be.
-
Poacher is an anonymous denizen of the internet.
denizen
noun
formal humorous
a person, animal, or plant that lives or is found in a particular place.
"denizens of field and forest"
synonyms: inhabitant, resident, townsman, townswoman, native, local; More
BRITISH historical
a foreigner allowed certain rights in their adopted country."
A denizen of the internet. A bit like me then.
-
I have seen an older post quoting this but I am not now sure I can share it because of the rules. Anyway this hopefully will put the bed the theories posted earlier here on this thread that Eddie would have alerted to bacon
Eddie, the dog with an advanced training to detect mortal victims (E.V.R.D.), searches and locates human remains and body fluids, including blood, in any environment or terrain. The initial training of the dog was done with human blood and decaying piglets that were born dead. The importance of this training is that the dog learnt to identify the odour of a decaying body that is not food. This guaranties that the dog ignores the 'bacon sandwich' and the 'kebab', etc. that are always present in the environment. Besides that the dog will not alert to a meal prepared at home or on any other place. For instance, the dog will be efficient on searching a cadaver in café where the clients can be sitted eating a bacon sandwich. As a complement of this training, the dog receives an additional training in the USA, in association with the FBI, in which will be used exclusively human remains' (sic) (page 2493 and 2494).
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/OUSTROS_APENSOS_11_VOLUMES.htm
-
In that same link it says:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/OUSTROS_APENSOS_11_VOLUMES.htm
"On one of the films, it's possible to see that 'Eddie' sniffs Madeleine's cuddle cat, more than once, bites it, throws it into the air and only after the toy is hidden does he 'mark' it (page 2099). Why didn't he signal it when he sniffs it on the first time'
Apart from all that was said about the dogs, we must also take into attention the results of the forensic analysis that was performed by the experts on the Scientific Police Laboratory on the day immediately after the facts, and already mentioned where no vestige of blood was found."
So even the PJ are questioning the validity of the Cuddle Cat alert.
-
I have seen an older post quoting this but I am not now sure I can share it because of the rules. Anyway this hopefully will put the bed the theories posted earlier here on this thread that Eddie would have alerted to bacon
Eddie, the dog with an advanced training to detect mortal victims (E.V.R.D.), searches and locates human remains and body fluids, including blood, in any environment or terrain. The initial training of the dog was done with human blood and decaying piglets that were born dead. The importance of this training is that the dog learnt to identify the odour of a decaying body that is not food. This guaranties that the dog ignores the 'bacon sandwich' and the 'kebab', etc. that are always present in the environment. Besides that the dog will not alert to a meal prepared at home or on any other place. For instance, the dog will be efficient on searching a cadaver in café where the clients can be sitted eating a bacon sandwich. As a complement of this training, the dog receives an additional training in the USA, in association with the FBI, in which will be used exclusively human remains' (sic) (page 2493 and 2494).
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/OUSTROS_APENSOS_11_VOLUMES.htm
What rule?
-
What rule?
afaiac there is no rule preventing any poster citing any post... Some seem to think there is
-
In that same link it says:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/OUSTROS_APENSOS_11_VOLUMES.htm
"On one of the films, it's possible to see that 'Eddie' sniffs Madeleine's cuddle cat, more than once, bites it, throws it into the air and only after the toy is hidden does he 'mark' it (page 2099). Why didn't he signal it when he sniffs it on the first time'
Apart from all that was said about the dogs, we must also take into attention the results of the forensic analysis that was performed by the experts on the Scientific Police Laboratory on the day immediately after the facts, and already mentioned where no vestige of blood was found."
So even the PJ are questioning the validity of the Cuddle Cat alert.
I have posted a report from the files, several times which sees the PJ questioning other alerts where the dog ignored places initially before later alerting... It begs the question whether if the dogs had been allowed more time in other apartments... As they were in 5a... There may have been alerts elsewhere
-
afaiac there is no rule preventing any poster citing any post... Some seem to think there is
It is my understanding that there is no such rule.
Does it make sense to ignore information on our own forum on the pretext it is 'time barred' when historic information from many other sources is used daily?
Which calls to mind Angelo's admonition from yesterday about linking to blogs and anonymous bloggers ... which is against forum protocols. It was rigidly enforced at one time but I think we may have been a bit relaxed about that of late ... so may be worth some thought about what is being linked to when posting in future.