The tracker dogs

[Brietta]

Were there? After 11pm on 4th?

Don't know.
I think if the dog had been particularly insistent about the door the handler would definitely have done something about it. If not immediately, certainly as soon as it was possible
As it was, the dog redirected and crossed to the area at the car park where he lost interest just as the first dog had.

I think it possible that whatever scent was being followed had got into a parked vehicle at that point which was then driven away.

[G-Unit]

Don't know.
I think if the dog had been particularly insistent about the door the handler would definitely have done something about it. If not immediately, certainly as soon as it was possible
As it was, the dog redirected and crossed to the area at the car park where he lost interest just as the first dog had.

I think it possible that whatever scent was being followed had got into a parked vehicle at that point which was then driven away.

I was thinking that everyone probably had an early night on 4th. Many staff and holidaymakers had been up very late on 3rd searching. Most of the holidaymakers were leaving the following day too.

The dogs and handlers came from Lisbon, a two and a half hour drive, arriving at 11pm. The operation began at 11.30pm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PEDRO_ESTEVES.htm

It's a minor detail, but it was the first dog who went to the Tapas entrance, not the second dog. It's possible that someone drove away, but there's nothing to support that idea.


 

[sadie]

My post was to get Robbity to cease and desist with a string of accusatory posts completely unsupported by evidence.

The dogs in the file as tracker dogs were deployed late overnight on 4/5 May i.e. perhaps 24 hours or more after Madeleine disappeared.

As to who was around at that time, the only person, with probable access to keys, I can think of is OC 24hr reception.

This is not about whether the GNR officers should have hunted down keys (multiple) to the Tapas reception, the Tapas restaurant and Bar etc.

If you can say who these other people were, it would be a step forward.

I accept your info.  Thank you, I had forgotten.

I was thinking, it seems in error, that the tracker dogs were used on the night of May3rd/4th



This begs the question,

"Why weren't they used on the night of the 3rd/4th.?"

[Robittybob1]

Don't know.
I think if the dog had been particularly insistent about the door the handler would definitely have done something about it. If not immediately, certainly as soon as it was possible
As it was, the dog redirected and crossed to the area at the car park where he lost interest just as the first dog had.

I think it possible that whatever scent was being followed had got into a parked vehicle at that point which was then driven away.

That is putting a lot of responsibility on the dog when you say "if the dog had been particularly insistent about the door" isn't it?

[Robittybob1]

Some stayed right through to about 7:00AM next morning

It appears the Batistas stayed till around 4:00 AM  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOAO_BATISTA.htm

"He continued searching until about 04.00 when he returned home with his wife."

So were the dogs not used in the first night?  Maybe that is where I've jumped the gun.

[ShiningInLuz]

I accept your info.  Thank you, I had forgotten.

I was thinking, it seems in error, that the tracker dogs were used on the night of May3rd/4th



This begs the question,

"Why weren't they used on the night of the 3rd/4th.?"

I don't know, is the basic answer.

Roughly speaking, the local PJ seem to have turned up at 1AM on 4 May 2007, and called it a night around 4AM.

There were no signs of a forced entry.

Quite why they should have insisted on tracker dogs being deployed from Lisbon when the GNR were already out with (non-tracker) dogs is a question I cannot answer.

Who requested tracker dogs from Lisbon?  I don't know.

[sadie]

Don't know.
I think if the dog had been particularly insistent about the door the handler would definitely have done something about it. If not immediately, certainly as soon as it was possible
As it was, the dog redirected and crossed to the area at the car park where he lost interest just as the first dog had.

I think it possible that whatever scent was being followed had got into a parked vehicle at that point which was then driven away.

This trail of scent could easily have been the other way around imo.  It could have been the scent of an abductor walking to 5A rather than away.

We dont know if the blanket or towel shown to the dogs had the abductors scent on it too.  The scent of a fearfully-sweaty man/ woman would overpower the scent of a small child.

If it were the other way round, then it would be even more interesting to know what cars had spent time on that little car park opposite the Tapas reception.  I wonder if The Carpenters know ... or the people in the villas opposite?

[Robittybob1]

I don't know, is the basic answer.

Roughly speaking, the local PJ seem to have turned up at 1AM on 4 May 2007, and called it a night around 4AM.

There were no signs of a forced entry.

Quite why they should have insisted on tracker dogs being deployed from Lisbon when the GNR were already out with (non-tracker) dogs is a question I cannot answer.

Who requested tracker dogs from Lisbon?  I don't know.

So is this an error in translation?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PEDRO_ESTEVES.htm

On the 4th of May of the current year, around 22H30, he was asked to use the dogs in conjunction with a search that attempted to retrace the steps taken by the missing minor. His role was to use the dogs' skills by allowing them to sniff a towel which had supposedly been used by the minor in question.

That the time "around 22H30" refers to time he was called ie around 22H30 on the 3rd, but by the time he arrive it was after midnight so the searching occurred on the 4th.  On the that morning the OC staff were available to at least 4:00 AM if not later.

In John Hill's statement http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_HILL.htm

- When questioned he stated that the search operations that he organised finished at about 04.30. Elements from the PJ and GNR reinforcements with sniffer dogs were still at the scene.

That is 4:30 AM on the morning of the 4th I presume.  Sniffer tracker dogs were there.

Emma Knight http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA-LOUISE.htm

The McCanns went to the new apartment and I remember seeing Kate and Mrs Payne seated on the sofa, each holding one of the twins. I left the new apartment at 04.30 in the morning after instructions from John Hill. I was the last to leave, the police had already left, but I left my number saying that I was available for anything that might be needed.

After a short rest I returned to work at 08.00. I did not see Kate or Gerry during the whole morning, but went to the new apartment at about lunchtime. Kate and Gerry were not there but there were other members of the group taking care of the twins.

[ShiningInLuz]

So is this an error in translation?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PEDRO_ESTEVES.htm
That the time "around 22H30" refers to time he was called ie around 22H30 on the 3rd, but by the time he arrive it was after midnight so the searching occurred on the 4th.  On the that morning the OC staff were available to at least 4:00 AM if not later.

In John Hill's statement http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_HILL.htm
That is 4:30 AM on the morning of the 4th I presume.  Sniffer tracker dogs were there.

Emma Knight http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA-LOUISE.htm

Lagos GNR deployed non-tracker dogs in the early hours of 4 May.

Lisbon tracker dogs were deployed late in the evening of 4 May.

[Brietta]

That is putting a lot of responsibility on the dog when you say "if the dog had been particularly insistent about the door" isn't it?

The dog has no responsibility for anything other than doing what it is trained to do.  If it was disinterested enough to leave the door and progress to the other side of the street the handler would probably have taken an inference from that.

[G-Unit]

This trail of scent could easily have been the other way around imo.  It could have been the scent of an abductor walking to 5A rather than away.

We dont know if the blanket or towel shown to the dogs had the abductors scent on it too.  The scent of a fearfully-sweaty man/ woman would overpower the scent of a small child.

If it were the other way round, then it would be even more interesting to know what cars had spent time on that little car park opposite the Tapas reception.  I wonder if The Carpenters know ... or the people in the villas opposite?

I could accept an abductor touching the blanket, but it's unlikely they touched a bath towel in my opinion. It would be helpful to know what the dogs did sniff. The mother should know and she says blanket. The dog handler should also know and he says turkish bath towel. Two very different things.

[Robittybob1]

Lagos GNR deployed non-tracker dogs in the early hours of 4 May.

Lisbon tracker dogs were deployed late in the evening of 4 May.

Can you actually prove that.  I showed you the quotes I found above which show it was possibly the day before.  On what basis do you say "Lisbon tracker dogs were deployed late in the evening of 4 May"

[ShiningInLuz]

Can you actually prove that.  I showed you the quotes I found above which show it was possibly the day before.  On what basis do you say "Lisbon tracker dogs were deployed late in the evening of 4 May"

On the basis that that is how it happened.  You have not shown me quotes that suggest otherwise.  Read up the dog handlers statements.

[Robittybob1]

I could accept an abductor touching the blanket, but it's unlikely they touched a bath towel in my opinion. It would be helpful to know what the dogs did sniff. The mother should know and she says blanket. The dog handler should also know and he says turkish bath towel. Two very different things.

Initially when I read that I thought it must mean that the two teams got different items to track with.
"The mother should know and she says blanket." is that from a quote from Kate's book?
With the number of people having been in the apartment prior to the dog searches any item in the apartment could already have been touched/ handled/ used by other people including an abductor or in my theory by an abductor or by a person moving another cadaver in or out of the apartment.

IMO a towel in general is more likely to be handled by someone else rather than the blanket. But as you say the blanket could have been handled by the abductor.

[Robittybob1]

The dog has no responsibility for anything other than doing what it is trained to do.  If it was disinterested enough to leave the door and progress to the other side of the street the handler would probably have taken an inference from that.

It seems a mistake to me to not go through that door when at the time of Madeleine going missing there seems to be evidence that the secondary reception was open.