Dog alerts indicating Cadaver Odor

[AnneGuedes]

Mr Grime does NOT say that Eddie had never made a false positive.

If you assert that, please provide a cite.

This belief is an unsupported myth.

Over to you.....

Think a bit.
How can MG affirm that Eddie never made a false positive ? Obviously only in the cases where forensic material was found at the alert point.
How can he affirm that it had happened Eddie giving a false negative ? Obviously only in the cases where forensic material was found at the non alert point.
In the case of an alert without forensic material, obviously it's impossible to affirm whether Eddie was right or false. That's what MG kept saying.

[Carana]

Some excellent points there Icabodcrane.

@Carana, do you have a link to Martin Grime's Jersey report? TIA

http://voiceforprotest.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/operation-rectangle-summary-report.html

Would you  like a link to the independent inquiry as well?

Why, is that site not independent? Yes please.

Even if true, it doesn't really change much does it? Either the Mccanns were extremely unlucky and the dog alerted to all sorts of innocent materials only in and outside their flat from where Madeleine disappeared, and nowhere else, what are the odds of that? or there is more to it.

It took me a while to find the link.

I believe that this is the right one:
http://www.gov.je/Government/Pages/StatesReports.aspx?ReportID=561

[Redblossom]

It's interesting to make a comparison of how much time was spent in all the other apartments and how much time was spent in the places Madeleine was known to have been -- as well as those places Madeleine was known not to have been but the McCanns were known to have been (if you follow the distinction) ...

It's not as simple as that. If the dog showed interest and his behaviour changed,more time would be spent to find the source of the interest. This did not happen in the other apartments, nor the Mccanns villa for that matter. Mr Grime's video commentary says where there was interest and where there wasn't.

You are assuming that with no proof.

You obviously have not watched the whole dog video then, I assume nothing.

[Lace]

I noticed a difference in time spent on the other apartments too.

In 5a Eddie was made to smell almost every inch of the floor by the wardrobe, called back to smell the furniture etc.

In the other apartments it seemed to me as if it was a quick search.   

Eddie was very interested in smelling behind I believe a cupboard in one of the other apartments?   Although the furniture was pulled out I didn't see Mr. Grime spending the length of time going over the floor as he had in 5a.

The same in the bedroom of the other apartments.   Eddie was smelling something under the bed in one of them and Mr. Grime calls him away actually telling him 'no'.   Mr. Grime didn't pull the bed out and have Eddie smell all over the floor of the bedroom.

We must remember too that 5a had been rented out to I think three other families, before Eddie and Keela were called in. 

[Redblossom]

Thanks Carana, will have a read, my question still stands, catch you later

[ferryman]

Ah, yes.

The definitive proof (in that report somewhere) that Eddie alerted to a coconut shell ...

[debunker]

I believe they are basically honest in their replies. I also believe that Mr Grime chooses his words carefully to remain within the rules of evidence at the same time as avoiding justified questions about the abilities of hisdogs. He does not lie but goes to great lengths to avoid unfortunate truths.

Honest "n their replies", then what about their acts ? And their intentions ?
Who wouldn't try to "avoid unfortunate truths" ? ;)

Well, for instance, someone who wanted to make the dogs seem more accurate than they are. The unfortunate truth is that dog alerts have quite a high error rate; Mr Grime repeatedly chooses forms of words that mask this.

For instance, many people here believe that he said that Eddie had never falsely alerted in over 200 cases. He did not say that.

[debunker]

Some excellent points there Icabodcrane.

@Carana, do you have a link to Martin Grime's Jersey report? TIA

http://voiceforprotest.blogspot.co.uk/2010/03/operation-rectangle-summary-report.html

Would you  like a link to the independent inquiry as well?

Why, is that site not independent? Yes please.

Even if true, it doesn't really change much does it? Either the Mccanns were extremely unlucky and the dog alerted to all sorts of innocent materials only in and outside their flat from where Madeleine disappeared, and nowhere else, what are the odds of that? or there is more to it.

The ods are quite high that such errors would occur.

[debunker]

Eddie alerts to dried blood ( whether from a living or dead person) AND/OR cadaver odor. Source: Mr Grime in the PJ files.

So you are saying that the sand containing the scent of a hundred year old cadaver was found by Eddie because he was sniffing blood?
 >@@(*&)

NO

Dogs make simple errors at least 1 alert in 10.

[debunker]

Only ifyou do not understand how truth is based on forensic or scientific methods.

*****

DB

What is sweeping is saying that truth is only truth if proven scientifically or forensically. There are things forensics and science cannot prove but which are true. Ie the lingering scent of the hundredsof molecules that make up cadaver odour. if such an instrument exists to do this I have never heard about it.  Truth of anything as provable on a court of law is different.

Such thoughts are not knowledge, but are unsupported belief.

Knowledge is defined as true belief supported by evidence. You have produced no evidence, merely stated a belief without any supporting evidence.

[ferryman]

Page 319 of the report:

My computer is not scrolling well, so I will add the rest in an edit:

A States of Jersey Police press release announced
that ‘forensic archaeologists searched an area of
the cellar rooms three and four and have discovered
some more bone fragments and two 'milk teeth'
from a child or children… the teeth could have come
from the same child although further tests will be
necessary to try and ascertain if that is the case,
and how the teeth might have come to be there’.
29 April 2008 Sean POWER asked Wendy KINNARD in The
States if the remains found were of a child - she
replied stating ‘the statement made about the
fragment of skull on 23rd February 2008 was
accurate. It was and continues to be the partial
remains of a child. The police have always
maintained that they did not know when, where or
how the person died. The fact that it was not
proved possible to date the fragment of skull does
not change the fact of what it was, nor does it
remove the possibility that he or she died of foul
play... it will remain premature to judge the con

[debunker]

Mr Grime does NOT say that Eddie had never made a false positive.

If you assert that, please provide a cite.

This belief is an unsupported myth.

Over to you.....

Think a bit.
How can MG affirm that Eddie never made a false positive ? Obviously only in the cases where forensic material was found at the alert point.
How can he affirm that it had happened Eddie giving a false negative ? Obviously only in the cases where forensic material was found at the non alert point.
In the case of an alert without forensic material, obviously it's impossible to affirm whether Eddie was right or false. That's what MG kept saying.

Exactly. Where no supporting evidence is found it is either a false alert or an alert without physical trace- all we can say is that no supporting evidence is produced by the alert because it could be a simple error on the part of the dog and handler.

[debunker]

It's interesting to make a comparison of how much time was spent in all the other apartments and how much time was spent in the places Madeleine was known to have been -- as well as those places Madeleine was known not to have been but the McCanns were known to have been (if you follow the distinction) ...

It's not as simple as that. If the dog showed interest and his behaviour changed,more time would be spent to find the source of the interest. This did not happen in the other apartments, nor the Mccanns villa for that matter. Mr Grime's video commentary says where there was interest and where there wasn't.

You are assuming that with no proof.

You obviously have not watched the whole dog video then, I assume nothing.

You are assuming plenty. I am assuming nothing.

[ferryman]

A little earlier than that, in fact.  Page 310:

0910hrs – Item found by anthropologist
 X and identified on scene as being
part of a child’s skull. This item is then exhibited
as JAR/6.
0930hrs – Exhibit JAR/6 is presented to the
Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog which gave an
indication suggestive of human remains.

The "remains" turned out to be a coconut shell ...

[Eleanor]

I noticed a difference in time spent on the other apartments too.

In 5a Eddie was made to smell almost every inch of the floor by the wardrobe, called back to smell the furniture etc.

In the other apartments it seemed to me as if it was a quick search.   

Eddie was very interested in smelling behind I believe a cupboard in one of the other apartments?   Although the furniture was pulled out I didn't see Mr. Grime spending the length of time going over the floor as he had in 5a.

The same in the bedroom of the other apartments.   Eddie was smelling something under the bed in one of them and Mr. Grime calls him away actually telling him 'no'.   Mr. Grime didn't pull the bed out and have Eddie smell all over the floor of the bedroom.

We must remember too that 5a had been rented out to I think three other families, before Eddie and Keela were called in.

This is true, and better said than I could.  Mr. Grime did most definitely spend much more time with the dogs on all things McCann.