Could the alerts in 5a have been caused by previous CSI chemicals?

[Brietta]

I still think that Eddie was influenced by something to alert as he did in apartment 5A and all I can think of are scents left by the previous investigation which used substances with which he was likely to be familiar and 5A the only place which had been treated with them.

11

[kizzy]

I still think that Eddie was influenced by something to alert as he did in apartment 5A and all I can think of are scents left by the previous investigation which used substances with which he was likely to be familiar and 5A the only place which had been treated with them.

That is only your thoughts.

Going back to basics - it wasn't a 100% nothing... found in there. 5A

That is why were here today - imo something was found.

Yet nothing - nothing 100% nothing was found in any other apartment.

[Mr Gray]

That is only your thoughts.

Going back to basics - it wasn't a 100% nothing... found in there. 5A

That is why were here today - imo something was found.

Yet nothing - nothing 100% nothing was found in any other apartment.

and someof us know exactly why

[faithlilly]

I still think that Eddie was influenced by something to alert as he did in apartment 5A and all I can think of are scents left by the previous investigation which used substances with which he was likely to be familiar and 5A the only place which had been treated with them.

Surely Murat’s villa would have been contaminated with the same scents as it was forensically examined too. Did Eddie alert in Murat’s villa ?

[John]

I still think that Eddie was influenced by something to alert as he did in apartment 5A and all I can think of are scents left by the previous investigation which used substances with which he was likely to be familiar and 5A the only place which had been treated with them.

That's an interesting observation Brietta and would explain the alerts in 5a but not elsewhere. It would be interesting to know if any of the chemicals used by CSI have an impact on these dogs. Maybe someone has come across this previously.

Did Grime or Harrison ever make reference to this possibility in any of their conclusions because if they didn't I feel that was a serious ommission.

[Robittybob1]

That's an interesting observation Brietta and would explain the alerts in 5a but not elsewhere. It would be interesting to know if any of the chemicals used by CSI have an impact on these dogs. Maybe someone has come across this previously.

Did Grime or Harrison ever make reference to this possibility in any of their conclusions because if they didn't I feel that was a serious ommission.

Wasn't it noted by Grime that the effects of masking are minimised.  The police would know if chemicals used by the police routinely prevented a cadaver dog from doing its job.

"The dogs' passive CSI alert provides an indication as per their training and does not vary. They only give an alert when they are 'positive' that the target of the odour is present and immediately accessible. If they had any doubts they would not give an alert. EVRD gives an alert by means of a vocal bark. The variations in the vocal alert can be explained by many reasons such as 'thirst' or 'lack of air due to effort'. 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. " http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm

[faithlilly]

Still there was nothing to ‘misinterpret’ with Murat because there were no alerts....even though that forensic fluid used in apartment 5a had been used there too.

[Brietta]

Still there was nothing to ‘misinterpret’ with Murat because there were no alerts....even though that forensic fluid used in apartment 5a had been used there too.

One might well presume a forensic team visited the Murat residence to collect samples and in the process use substances for detecting blood ... but I am afraid it requires a cite to substantiate that presumption.

[faithlilly]

One might well presume a forensic team visited the Murat residence to collect samples and in the process use substances for detecting blood ... but I am afraid it requires a cite to substantiate that presumption.

Here you go.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/may/16/ukcrime.gilestremlett

And there was still no alerts in Murat’s villa even though substances would have been used in the villa that were used in 5a....I believe dispelling a belief on your part that they may have been the cause of the alerts in 5a.

[Brietta]

Here you go.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/may/16/ukcrime.gilestremlett

And there was still no alerts in Murat’s villa even though substances would have been used in the villa that were used in 5a....I believe dispelling a belief on your part that they may have been the cause of the alerts in 5a.

With respect ... your cite mentions nothing about searching for blood using a substance such as ~ "Kastle-Mayer" peroxide test ~ which means it is not a valid cite.
Which in my opinion makes your following sentence ... just as your first was ... inaccurate and misleading.

[faithlilly]

With respect ... your cite mentions nothing about searching for blood using a substance such as ~ "Kastle-Mayer" peroxide test ~ which means it is not a valid cite.
Which in my opinion makes your following sentence ... just as your first was ... inaccurate and misleading.

Tell me Brietta what samples do you think the PJ were looking for in Murat’s car ?

[Alice Purjorick]

With respect ... your cite mentions nothing about searching for blood using a substance such as ~ "Kastle-Mayer" peroxide test ~ which means it is not a valid cite.
Which in my opinion makes your following sentence ... just as your first was ... inaccurate and misleading.

You ought to read documents linked.
I linked that on 14th Aug. 2018
Misty linked it yesterday.

p.s I dont intend to link it again.

[John]

This is a new thread.

[Sunny]

and someof us know exactly why

Could you explain your reply (above) that was to this post please.

That is only your thoughts.

Going back to basics - it wasn't a 100% nothing... found in there. 5A

That is why were here today - imo something was found.

Yet nothing - nothing 100% nothing was found in any other apartment.

I take this post to mean something was found in 5A but nothing elsewhere.  Please explain Davel.

[G-Unit]

I still think that Eddie was influenced by something to alert as he did in apartment 5A and all I can think of are scents left by the previous investigation which used substances with which he was likely to be familiar and 5A the only place which had been treated with them.

11

I don't know what you mean by 'treated with them'. As I understand it the only substance which would have come into contact with any part of the apartment would have been distilled water used to moisten a swab. The swab would then be tested with the substances, not the source stain.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aPz_AV0t3U