Author Topic: Another view of dog evidence  (Read 54118 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #15 on: April 09, 2013, 10:10:26 AM »

The Dogs are allowed to Free Search?  Don't make me laugh.  Eddie was just getting fed up with being dragged back.

And as for alerts only from Eddie.  So called Cadaver Dogs do alert to decomposing body fluids from live people.  Cadaver Dog Handlers say this.

The more I read about these dogs the less I believe that they are any use as deployed in Portugal where they were out of their comfort zone.  The only real use a cadaver dog is for finding corpses as has been shown with some recent cases.  Anything else and they are useless.


Which on translation means......

It's OK to use them in other cases, but it wasn't quite cricket in the Mccann case 8)><( 8)><( 8)><(

Offline Eleanor

Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #16 on: April 09, 2013, 10:12:57 AM »

The Dogs are allowed to Free Search?  Don't make me laugh.  Eddie was just getting fed up with being dragged back.

And as for alerts only from Eddie.  So called Cadaver Dogs do alert to decomposing body fluids from live people.  Cadaver Dog Handlers say this.

The more I read about these dogs the less I believe that they are any use as deployed in Portugal where they were out of their comfort zone.  The only real use a cadaver dog is for finding corpses as has been shown with some recent cases.  Anything else and they are useless.

My dog can find a Cadaver if there is one.  And I don't charge those exorbitant prices.

C.Edwards

  • Guest
Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #17 on: April 09, 2013, 10:33:50 AM »

The more I read about these dogs the less I believe that they are any use as deployed in Portugal where they were out of their comfort zone.  The only real use a cadaver dog is for finding corpses as has been shown with some recent cases.  Anything else and they are useless.

If you weren't such an expert in dog handling I might question your statement on the grounds of D'Andre Lane's conviction. Where's the corpse?

Oh, let me guess, D'Andre Lane is a victim of a corrupt police force too. It was probably Amaral's fault as well.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #18 on: April 09, 2013, 10:53:07 AM »

The more I read about these dogs the less I believe that they are any use as deployed in Portugal where they were out of their comfort zone.  The only real use a cadaver dog is for finding corpses as has been shown with some recent cases.  Anything else and they are useless.

If you weren't such an expert in dog handling I might question your statement on the grounds of D'Andre Lane's conviction. Where's the corpse?

Oh, let me guess, D'Andre Lane is a victim of a corrupt police force too. It was probably Amaral's fault as well.

There was a lot more to the D'andre Case than just dogs.  And the dogs didn't actually prove anything.  Personally, I have my doubts about that Case.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #19 on: April 09, 2013, 03:10:44 PM »
All promotional material on his website.  If Grimes doesn't deliver his reputation goes down the tubes.  Consequently there is an overriding need to achieve results.  Any idiot can stand at a car and keep calling a dog back. What a charade.   @)(++(*

hmm

Grime is an  'idiot'  ...  and you know more about his job than he does 

OK then ...
You forgot to add an 'idiot' like the US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation  and International Law enforcement agencies who watched those very publicised videos and fell in the trap !
Now it was a pity the tests weren't double blind (we don't know who decided so, Mark Harrison was leading the team). Knowing where is the suspect thing, anyone would be influenced and influence his/her dog. Nonetheless Eddie interestingly didn't react to all parts of the flat and reacted in a corner where Keela found no blood.

Online John

Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #20 on: April 09, 2013, 03:14:30 PM »
Does everyone realise that the dog would find the environment in Portugal to be completely alien to what he was used to.  If they were going to do such specialised tests they should have used a Portuguese doggy.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #21 on: April 09, 2013, 03:23:20 PM »
Does everyone realise that the dog would find the environment in Portugal to be completely alien to what he was used to.  If they were going to do such specialised tests they should have used a Portuguese doggy.
They did use three sniffer dogs (one from Portimao and two from the GNR school), on different days. Interestingly they didn't follow the path of the carrier seen by Jane T. but another one, the same.

Offline DCI

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2585
  • Total likes: 6
  • Why are some folks so sick in the head!!!
Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #22 on: April 09, 2013, 03:39:14 PM »
I couldn't actually see the point, in Grime and his dogs going to Praia Da Luz, at all.
Bit late after 3 months, what was the point.

They could have has UK dogs and police, within the week, but Amaral refused the help.
According to the REAL files, Williams and Grime seemed more interested in getting the right costs, down on paper.
Kate's 500 Mile Cycle Challenge

https://www.justgiving.com/KateMcCann/

icabodcrane

  • Guest
Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #23 on: April 09, 2013, 03:48:14 PM »
All promotional material on his website.  If Grimes doesn't deliver his reputation goes down the tubes.  Consequently there is an overriding need to achieve results.  Any idiot can stand at a car and keep calling a dog back. What a charade.   @)(++(*

Excellent point. The reality is that what icabodcrane has posted is Grime's own promotional fluff.

What difference does that make  ? 

...  are you suggesting he is lying about his credentials ?

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #24 on: April 09, 2013, 03:55:38 PM »
Key point to note about Eddie's alert to the car; actually, two.

1.  It was not a false alert.

2. It was not an incriminating alert.

The provenance of the alert is known and innocent; spots of Gerry's blood on the ignition "key" (actually a card, an alternative type of ignition system).  This was confirmed after the blood dog, Keela, also alerted to it and Grime took just about the only decision for which I give him (genuine) credit -- to have Eddie test the card separately and independently of the car.  It was buried inside a sandbox and Eddie was invited to react to it a second time.  He did so. 

The card was sent to the FSS and Gerry's dna was extracted from it. 

While Grime's decision to have the key card tested independently is to be lauded, his decision to have Eddie inspect 10 cars simultaneously is more questionable.  Just as there actually was an innocent scent in the Renault, so there might easily have been innocent scents in any of the other cars. 

In that event, what would or should the poor dog have been supposed to react to?

And another question: of the 10 cars inspected, one was hired 3 weeks after Madeleine's abduction (the only real car of interest); two were owned by Robert Murat (fair enough) and 7 were owned or driven by people never suspects in the case.

What was that all about?

One car hired by Murat never made the line-up of 10 ...


icabodcrane

  • Guest
Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #25 on: April 09, 2013, 04:02:25 PM »
Key point to note about Eddie's alert to the car; actually, two.

1.  It was not a false alert.

2. It was not an incriminating alert.

The provenance of the alert is known and innocent; spots of Gerry's blood on the ignition "key" (actually a card, an alternative type of ignition system).  This was confirmed after the blood dog, Keela, also alerted to it and Grime took just about the only decision for which I give him (genuine) credit -- to have Eddie test the card separately and independently of the car.  It was buried inside a sandbox and Eddie was invited to react to it a second time.  He did so. 

The card was sent to the FSS and Gerry's dna was extracted from it. 

While Grime's decision to have the key card tested independently is to be lauded, his decision to have Eddie inspect 10 cars simultaneously is more questionable.  Just as there actually was an innocent scent in the Renault, so there might easily have been innocent scents in any of the other cars. 

In that event, what would or should the poor dog have been supposed to react to?

And another question: of the 10 cars inspected, one was hired 3 weeks after Madeleine's abduction (the only real car of interest); two were owned by Robert Murat (fair enough) and 7 were owned or driven by people never suspects in the case.

What was that all about?

One car hired by Murat never made the line-up of 10 ...

Where did you find the information about the sand box detail ...  and who the cars belonged to ? 

Just out of interest because I'd like to read it

Offline xtina

Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #26 on: April 09, 2013, 04:12:20 PM »
The heat is scorching on this thirtieth day of July 2007 when two Springer Spaniels, Eddie and Keela, get off the British Airways plane, accompanied by their trainer, Martin Grime. An air-conditioned vehicle is waiting to take them to their accommodation. A vet, who will be on hand during their stay, has been brought in to intervene in case of illness or if the dogs get bitten by a snake. Their mission: to find Madeleine's body and expose those responsible.

Eddie has been involved in a great number of cases, helping the police to resolve a good many riddles, thanks to his sense of smell. Even if the body has been moved, objects the body has touched have been contaminated by its odour, especially porous materials, fabrics, the upholstery in cars, etc. And that odour, Eddie knows how to recognise out of a thousand.

Keela, a scenes of crime specialist, is capable of locating particles of blood even after a place has been cleaned with chemical products or bleach. Sometimes, the residues are so microscopic they are missed by the instruments of the forensic police, as sophicticated as they are, and it's impossible to harvest them without taking all of what they are on.

Eddie is always the first to be brought onto a site. Once he has discerned the odour that he knows so well, it's Keela's turn to go into action, on the lookout for the slightest whiff of blood. The simultaneous presence of the two elements in a given place - blood and cavaver odours - is taken to indicate that a body has been there and that it's probably there that the death occurred.

The dogs' CV is impressive. Besides collaborating in hundreds of investigations, they passed the practical tests brilliantly at the FBI's "Body Farm," the only place in the world where human cadavers are used to simulate homicide scenarios and concealment of bodies.

Amongst the most media-covered cases, which they contributed to resolving, is that of the disappearance in Northern Ireland of Attracta Harron, who was last seen when she was returning home on foot, after having been to church. All searches carried out by the police were unsuccessful. The main suspect's car having been totally burnt out in a mysterious fire, couldn't be examined. They called in Eddie, who examined the charred remains of the vehicle and immediately picked out the characteristic odour. Human tissue was found amongst the debris, the DNA of which corresponded to the missing woman. Later, the dog indicated the place - close to a river - where the victim's body had been abandoned. At the home of the suspect, where the police were searching for incriminating evidence, Eddie identified cadaver odour in one of the bedrooms. The man confessed to having killed the woman then moving her body to the banks of the river.

The case of Amanda Edwards, reported missing, is also very impressive. The police, who conducted a search of her ex-partner's home, found small bloodstains there, but no trace of a body. The dog, who was brought in for the examination of the man''s vehicle, alerted to cadaver odour on the tools stored in the boot (a shovel, a level and a compactor). The police went to the building site where the suspect had worked a few days before and discovered the body, buried in a garage. The murderer had made efficient use of his tools to carry out his task.

It's also thanks to the help of the dogs that the case of Charlotte Pinkley, a missing British woman, who had been imprisoned by her ex-partner, was resolved. The police requested the help of the specialist dog team to try to find the young woman's body. Eddie picked out a place where the abductor had provisionally left his victim. In the surrounding area, the investigators found the button from a dress that had belonged to Charlotte. That clue exposed the murderer, who ended up showing the police the place where he had hidden the body.

More recently, it's Eddie who helps to find a body buried under a flagstone at the former orphanage, Haut-de-la-Garenne, in Jersey, setting for a terrible case of paedophilia and child murder.

The achievements of the dog detectives are the result of a very long apprenticeship. It all starts with the selection of the best puppies when they are only a few months old. The most talented breed for this unusual "profession," is the Springer Spaniel. The trainer, Martin Grime, and his pupils undergo aptitude tests every year in order to obtain certificates proving their capability. In Great Britain, the police have no hesitation in calling in the specialist dog teams to assist in certain criminal investigations. Their skills are nowadays recognised by journalists, police and courts all over the world.
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #27 on: April 09, 2013, 04:13:07 PM »
Key point to note about Eddie's alert to the car; actually, two.

1.  It was not a false alert.

2. It was not an incriminating alert.

The provenance of the alert is known and innocent; spots of Gerry's blood on the ignition "key" (actually a card, an alternative type of ignition system).  This was confirmed after the blood dog, Keela, also alerted to it and Grime took just about the only decision for which I give him (genuine) credit -- to have Eddie test the card separately and independently of the car.  It was buried inside a sandbox and Eddie was invited to react to it a second time.  He did so. 

The card was sent to the FSS and Gerry's dna was extracted from it. 

While Grime's decision to have the key card tested independently is to be lauded, his decision to have Eddie inspect 10 cars simultaneously is more questionable.  Just as there actually was an innocent scent in the Renault, so there might easily have been innocent scents in any of the other cars. 

In that event, what would or should the poor dog have been supposed to react to?

And another question: of the 10 cars inspected, one was hired 3 weeks after Madeleine's abduction (the only real car of interest); two were owned by Robert Murat (fair enough) and 7 were owned or driven by people never suspects in the case.

What was that all about?

One car hired by Murat never made the line-up of 10 ...

Where did you find the information about the sand box detail ...  and who the cars belonged to ? 

Just out of interest because I'd like to read it

Scroll down to the seventh section in this link marked by the dark blue band and you'll find the sequence of events described.

If this board permits edits, I will add the relevant section from John Lowe's report.

It does allow edits:

7th section down marked by the dark blue band

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DOGS_INSPECTION.htm
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 04:16:16 PM by ferryman »

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #28 on: April 09, 2013, 04:14:38 PM »
Apologies, I forgot to add the link and this board doesn't allow edits.  7th section marked by the dark blue band:

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DOGS_INSPECTION.htm#p8p2186

ETA:

Cite from John Lowe's forensic report:

An incomplete, low-level DNA profile that matched corresponding components in the profile of Gerald McCann was obtained from cellular material present on the card key -  (286C/2007-CRL (12)).
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 05:17:30 PM by John »

Online John

Re: Another view of dog evidence
« Reply #29 on: April 09, 2013, 04:23:54 PM »
A short video showing some of the dog testing in the underground garage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FTF4JTLeOWA
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.