Author Topic: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB  (Read 357972 times)

0 Members and 13 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2580 on: November 07, 2020, 06:17:43 PM »
Probably but don't ask me to find the post.

Ive already found it...


Given that Grime's opinion was that these alerts were triggered by cadaver scent, and that the alerts seemed to be suggesting a connection between the site of the missing child's disappearance, her toy, her clothes and her mother's clothes, there had to be an attempt to find corroborating evidence in my opinion.


http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10062.msg483041#msg483041

grime has never stated it was his opinion the alert was to cadaver scent



Offline Robittybob1

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2581 on: November 07, 2020, 06:18:33 PM »
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10062.msg483072#msg483072

gunit posted..

Grime's opinion was that these alerts were triggered by cadaver scent"

which is not supported by any evidence,.....didnt take long to find
With 95% confidence.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2582 on: November 07, 2020, 06:19:49 PM »
With 95% confidence.

Grime has never said the alerts in the apt have 95% confidence so you are spreading misinformation too

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2583 on: November 07, 2020, 06:26:19 PM »
Grime has never said the alerts in the apt have 95% confidence so you are spreading misinformation too
95% was mentioned somewhere down the line. "Suggestive" was based on Eddie's training confidence achievement IMO.
His training record showed he was 95% correct overall (according to Grime IIRC).   
« Last Edit: November 07, 2020, 06:29:17 PM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2584 on: November 07, 2020, 06:29:11 PM »
From what I can see the americans were interested in keela...the blood dog as your quote shows.

rex stockham had alerady set up the programme for cadaver dogs before grime went to the US. Stckham wanted to give the alerts some scientific basis...he never managed them.

Quoting some obscure news report as two of the best in the business does not substantialte your claim re the FBI

When did the FBI/Stockham set up their programme?
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Vertigo Swirl

"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2586 on: November 07, 2020, 06:40:04 PM »
When did the FBI/Stockham set up their programme?

Stockham testified that he developed a cadaver dog program for the FBI starting in
2005.15 While developing this program, he met Martin Grime, a National Homicide Search
Advisor in the United Kingdom who worked with cadaver dogs. In 2010 or 2011, Grime started
to work with the FBI to help develop its program.


so why does Grime claim in 2007

I am a Special Advisor to The U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of

Investigation, in relation to their Canine Forensic Program.



when stockham says it was 2010
« Last Edit: November 07, 2020, 06:43:44 PM by Davel »

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2587 on: November 07, 2020, 06:47:27 PM »
95% was mentioned somewhere down the line. "Suggestive" was based on Eddie's training confidence achievement IMO.
His training record showed he was 95% correct overall (according to Grime IIRC).

Grime has never said the alerts in the apt have 95% confidence so you are spreading misinformation too

Offline G-Unit

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2588 on: November 07, 2020, 06:58:18 PM »
Stockham testified that he developed a cadaver dog program for the FBI starting in
2005.15 While developing this program, he met Martin Grime, a National Homicide Search
Advisor in the United Kingdom who worked with cadaver dogs. In 2010 or 2011, Grime started
to work with the FBI to help develop its program.


so why does Grime claim in 2007

I am a Special Advisor to The U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of

Investigation, in relation to their Canine Forensic Program.



when stockham says it was 2010

I see there are no links provided. Could you rectify that oversight please?
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2589 on: November 07, 2020, 06:59:26 PM »
Grime has never said the alerts in the apt have 95% confidence so you are spreading misinformation too
How did Grime define "suggestive"?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2590 on: November 07, 2020, 07:04:23 PM »
How did Grime define "suggestive"?

he never did...which imo ..is unprofessional

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2591 on: November 07, 2020, 07:05:59 PM »
I see there are no links provided. Could you rectify that oversight please?
http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opncavwp/0140174.pdf

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2592 on: November 07, 2020, 07:06:34 PM »
Who said anything about Madeleine's dead body?  She is abducted from outside very much alive, wasn't she?

Not according to Barrier.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2593 on: November 07, 2020, 07:09:00 PM »
Maybe the stickers aren't proof it belonged to the McCanns.

Of course not.  Some other person was doing this and their car got picked up by mistake.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2594 on: November 07, 2020, 07:12:51 PM »
Not according to Barrier.
To be honest I don't know what anyone believes.  At times past I did ask for everyone to put their theories forward but it never happened.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.