What is wrong about this YouTube summary -Meet the Suspects video?

[Robittybob1]

Casting aspersions on dog's capabilities is habitual for some. In my opinion it has more to do with a narrative they want to uphold than with the dog's actual suitabilities and capabilities. Tracker dogs use scent to track a live individual, not a body btw.

I'm not stupid.

[Eleanor]

https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11844.msg632150#msg632150
Your cite was Eleanor - I'll be damned!

Have you read the one from John?  The one with your name underneath.

[Robittybob1]

Have you read the one from John?  The one with your name underneath.

I did start but it was a bit long winded.  I'll try again.

I'm not reading all the individual cases.

But he backs down a bit 200 cases could be 200 case searches.

[Eleanor]

I did start but it was a bit long winded.  I'll try again.

I'm not reading all the individual cases.

But he backs down a bit 200 cases could be 200 case searches.

How can you expect to know what is going on if you don't read Comments?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Casting aspersions on dog's capabilities is habitual for some. In my opinion it has more to do with a narrative they want to uphold than with the dog's actual suitabilities and capabilities. Tracker dogs use scent to track a live individual, not a body btw.

So Madeleine didn’t die in the apartment then? 

[Robittybob1]

How can you expect to know what is going on if you don't read Comments?

Since becoming a moderator my main focus is making sure the posts meet the forum rules rather than their content. 

[Robittybob1]

So Madeleine didn’t die in the apartment then?

That would depend on what theory you prefer.
If you accept that the sniffer dogs followed Madeleine's scent from the apartment to the car park. Then yes.

If you think the dogs tracked her but in the wrong direction - Then possibly No.

[Robittybob1]

Good posts re-tracker dogs used in the McCann case:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10879.msg544652#msg544652

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10879.msg544685#msg544685

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10879.msg544711#msg544711

I think from that G-unit was arguing that the dogs may not have been tracking Madeleine's scent at all. A claim that can't be proven at all at this point in time.

The GNR officers were satisfied it was Madeleine's scent (training).   I wonder why we should dispute that without evidence to the contrary.

[Mr Gray]

Good posts re-tracker dogs used in the McCann case:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10879.msg544652#msg544652

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10879.msg544685#msg544685

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10879.msg544711#msg544711

I think from that G-unit was arguing that the dogs may not have been tracking Madeleine's scent at all. A claim that can't be proven at all at this point in time.

The GNR officers were satisfied it was Madeleine's scent (training).   I wonder why we should dispute that without evidence to the contrary.

Wolters is sure Maddie is murdered by CB... Should we, dispute that..

We should question everything... Not accept things blindly

[faithlilly]

Wolters is sure Maddie is murdered by CB... Should we, dispute that..

We should question everything... Not accept things blindly

But isn’t that exactly what you are doing?

Wolter says he that he has concrete evidence, neither you nor, allegedly, Cressida Dick has seen that evidence....yet you believe it wholeheartedly. Isn’t that the very definition of blind faith? That faith seems to be based on nothing more than the assumption that he wouldn’t over-egg the evidence.
 
If I’m wrong tell me exactly what has convinced you that Wolter’s evidence is as solid as he claims?

[Mr Gray]

But isn’t that exactly what you are doing?

Wolter says he that he has concrete evidence, neither you nor, allegedly, Cressida Dick has seen that evidence....yet you believe it wholeheartedly. Isn’t that the very definition of blind faith? That faith seems to be based on nothing more than the assumption that he wouldn’t over-egg the evidence.
 
If I’m wrong tell me exactly what has convinced you that Wolter’s evidence is as solid as he claims?

I believe Wolters has concrete evidence.. Not blindly... But based on several factors  which I have already explained. Why should I continually repeat this for your benefit. It's not important to me whether you accept it ir not.
If the PJ announced  they had concrete evidence of the mccanns involvement I would see that as highly significant and not simply dismiss it

[faithlilly]

I believe Wolters has concrete evidence.. Not blindly... But based on several factors  which I have already explained. Why should I continually repeat this for your benefit. It's not important to me whether you accept it ir not.
If the PJ announced  they had concrete evidence of the mccanns involvement I would see that as highly significant and not simply dismiss it

You have given no credible reason why you believe him other than....why would he lie.

To be clear...I’m not accusing him of lying per se but he wouldn’t be the first legal official who has become so fixated on a suspect that he can’t see the wood for the trees and totally skews an investigation because of it.

[Mr Gray]

You have given no credible reason why you believe him other than....why would he lie.

To be clear...I’m not accusing him of lying per se but he wouldn’t be the first legal official who has become so fixated on a suspect that he can’t see the wood for the trees and totally skews an investigation because of it.

No I have other reasons which if you had read previous posts you would understand.. I'm not going to repeat them because it's pointless

[Mr Gray]

CB it seems has a team of very expensive experienced lawyers. If HCW has told  a litany of lies he will no doubt be severely punished for it. To mislead SY...the parents and the public would be a total disgrace. To tell the McCanns he can show Maddie died at the hands of  a cruel sadistic paedophile would unforgivable. He will be sued and deservedly so.

The fact is none of these lawyers as yet have claimed the evidence doesnt exist...theyve just asked to see it also says a lot to me.

on balance...for me...Wolters has significant evidence

[Robittybob1]

we've had heaps of threads about Wolters etc.  Relate that to the video and we'll discuss it or otherwise, it is off-topic. and I'll delete it.  OK for the next 8 hours I'm sleeping so you might get away with it for a while.