The truth about the Cadaver Dogs and DNA

[debunker]

Answers to my questions

KEela the blood dog alerts to blood
EDdie the cadaverdog reacts to blood and cadaver odor.

SO what do individual reactions of a single dog tell us? Most important, what does an isolated alert from Eddie tell us?

LP

ANyone not believe that or anyone able to answer the question s above?

Well,  since you open the question to all,  I'll take a stab at it  (  although I have already mentioned that I am no expert  ) 

I would guess that if both Keela  ( the blood dog )  and Eddie  ( the cadaver dog )  alerted in the same place,  then it would be possible that someone had bled and died in that location.

If Eddie,  alone,  alerted,  then it might be supposed that a dead body that had not bled  had been in that location at some point

I'm almost afraid to post an honest reply like that because this thread is quite intimidating and has an aura of bullying about it

That would be more or less my presumption too. But there is the proviso that I expect the EVRD dog (Eddie) also alerts to dried blood from a living person.  I am no expert but surely any part of a body (ranging from a severed arm to dead skin and dried blood) would also create minute amounts of cadaver scent as they are effectively part of a dead body?

But if that were the case gilet,  cadaver dogs would be worthless  ...  they'd be alerting inaccurately all over the place

As far as I am aware, they are very valued by the police and law enforcement agencies who use them,  which suggests their reliability is trusted

Cadaver dogs will react to odors from products of putrefaction such as Cadaverine and Putresine. Hair and nails donot putrify but wounds, menstrual flow, infected urine and seminal fluid do emit such odors.

[gilet]

I don't pretend to have any knowledge. Please, for f**ks sake, enlighten me.

That's pretty much where I am too, Sika.

One thing that has always puzzled me...what was Kate's reason for washing "Cuddlecat"? I think if it was me, I'd have kept it in a sealed bag to preserve Maddy's scent.

The cuddlecat toy was washed on Thursday July 12th more than two months after Madeleine went missing. As Kate had been carrying it around for the whole of that time then I suspect there was not the slightest chance of Kate recognising anything but the scent of herself, the twins and things like the sun cream she said was on the toy by that stage. It was probably quite filthy to be honest.

[John]

For the benefit of the uninformed, ie. me, could someone please offer their views on the evidence collected by the dogs?
It is cited as being a major piece of evidence, in the case against the McCanns. Would be nice to hear it debated.

I think the best place to start is with the summary by the dog handler himself in his own report.

"SUMMARY

The tasking for this operation was as per my normal Standard Operating
Procedures. The dogs are deployed as search assets to secure evidence and
locate human remains or Human blood.

The dogs only alerted to property associated with the McCann family. The dog
alert indications MUST be corroborated if to establish their findings as
evidence.

Therefore in this particular case, as no human remains were located, the only
alert indications that may become corroborated are those that the CSI dog
indicated by forensic laboratory analysis.

My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence."

He does not even claim for certain that there was cadaver scent, never mind that it was definitely related to Madeleine McCann.

The point made earlier by another poster that an alert is meaningless unless corroborated by forensics is very important. The example given was a dog alerting when searching for a bomb but no bomb is found. Should that building be permanently under suspicion? Should the McCanns be permanently under suspicion based on uncorroborated alerts?

So to put it bluntly from the viewpoint of the dog handler the whole exercise was a complete waste of time?

[debunker]

I note that Stephen25000 is lurking but not posting. I wonder why?

[puglove]

I don't pretend to have any knowledge. Please, for f**ks sake, enlighten me.

That's pretty much where I am too, Sika.

One thing that has always puzzled me...what was Kate's reason for washing "Cuddlecat"? I think if it was me, I'd have kept it in a sealed bag to preserve Maddy's scent.

The cuddlecat toy was washed on Thursday July 12th more than two months after Madeleine went missing. As Kate had been carrying it around for the whole of that time then I suspect there was not the slightest chance of Kate recognising anything but the scent of herself, the twins and things like the sun cream she said was on the toy by that stage. It was probably quite filthy to be honest.

Thanks, gilet. I didn't realise that the toy had been washed so long after Maddy went missing. So much information to plough through.

[sika]

I note that Stephen25000 is lurking but not posting. I wonder why?

You could say that he has been well and truly, debunked!

[icabodcrane]

For the benefit of the uninformed, ie. me, could someone please offer their views on the evidence collected by the dogs?
It is cited as being a major piece of evidence, in the case against the McCanns. Would be nice to hear it debated.

I think the best place to start is with the summary by the dog handler himself in his own report.

"SUMMARY

The tasking for this operation was as per my normal Standard Operating
Procedures. The dogs are deployed as search assets to secure evidence and
locate human remains or Human blood.

The dogs only alerted to property associated with the McCann family. The dog
alert indications MUST be corroborated if to establish their findings as
evidence.

Therefore in this particular case, as no human remains were located, the only
alert indications that may become corroborated are those that the CSI dog
indicated by forensic laboratory analysis.

My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence."

He does not even claim for certain that there was cadaver scent, never mind that it was definitely related to Madeleine McCann.

The point made earlier by another poster that an alert is meaningless unless corroborated by forensics is very important. The example given was a dog alerting when searching for a bomb but no bomb is found. Should that building be permanently under suspicion? Should the McCanns be permanently under suspicion based on uncorroborated alerts?

So to put it bluntly from the viewpoint of the dog handler the whole exercise was a complete waste of time?

If a dog alerted to explosives on a plane I was about to board,  and following a search I was told,  "It's OK,  we couldn't find any bomb,  you can get on board now"  ....  would I get on it ?

Not a chance

Would you John ?

[debunker]

He is currently reading this thread.

[Eleanor]

It was a complete waste of time for the dog handler, for which he was handsomely paid.

[gilet]

For the benefit of the uninformed, ie. me, could someone please offer their views on the evidence collected by the dogs?
It is cited as being a major piece of evidence, in the case against the McCanns. Would be nice to hear it debated.

I think the best place to start is with the summary by the dog handler himself in his own report.

"SUMMARY

The tasking for this operation was as per my normal Standard Operating
Procedures. The dogs are deployed as search assets to secure evidence and
locate human remains or Human blood.

The dogs only alerted to property associated with the McCann family. The dog
alert indications MUST be corroborated if to establish their findings as
evidence.

Therefore in this particular case, as no human remains were located, the only
alert indications that may become corroborated are those that the CSI dog
indicated by forensic laboratory analysis.

My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence."

He does not even claim for certain that there was cadaver scent, never mind that it was definitely related to Madeleine McCann.

The point made earlier by another poster that an alert is meaningless unless corroborated by forensics is very important. The example given was a dog alerting when searching for a bomb but no bomb is found. Should that building be permanently under suspicion? Should the McCanns be permanently under suspicion based on uncorroborated alerts?

So to put it bluntly from the viewpoint of the dog handler the whole exercise was a complete waste of time?

It would seem he is definitely saying that the EVRD dog evidence is worthless as evidence but he does hold out hope that maybe some of the blood samples might be of more value and after forensic analysis provide some clues as to where Madeleine had been (or even been hurt). But as we now know there was no direct forensic connection made to Madeleine so even the blood dog alerts did not get corroborated and could not be used. 

Whoever leaked those wildly inaccurate stories to the Portuguese and UK media and effectively started these myths about the case should hang their heads in shame. I think we all know after Leveson that the source was within the Portuguese Police. Maybe some day we will learn the names?

[debunker]

Try Amaral.

[debunker]

The important fact to grasp is that misinterpretation of the dog evidence and DNA evidence not only confused the [ censored word], but that the PJ were also confused and in error.

[registrar]

It was a complete waste of time for the dog handler, for which he was handsomely paid.

60 odd thousand pounds

followed by 90 odd k's in Jersey

where equally no body was ever found

[debunker]

Stephen25000 is still reading this thread.

[John]

@ Stephen25000

Let us start with basics before getting complicated

What odor does Eddie the Cadaver dog alert to?
What odor does Keela the Blood dog alert to?

What does a single alert by either mean?

Why are the deployed together?

I await the the answer to my question first.

Now let's try you on a basic piece of simple science first.

Can you provide me with a list of compounds which these dogs can alert to ?

P.S. I hold degrees in Science, including one in Chemistry.

Here's a simple task for you.

Provide a pathway for the synthesis of Benzene from Carbon.

Please don't bother googling it, that won't impress me.

Do you know what !,5 Diaminopentane/Pentane-1,2-diammine is ?

There's a whole lot more to follow. 

All this serves to show is that the issue of the cadaver dogs is well overrated and more of a hit and miss depending on any amount of variables prevailing on the day.   No wonder the dog handler keeps a dignified silence.