Could the cadaver scent have been planted?

[Luz]

Only irrational persons could imply that there was any interest on finding the McCann guilty.
For Portugal it would be more comfortable to consider as true the fantasy created by the McCann. A strange abductor that takes a little child away would, politically, be much easier to deal with than trying to find out the truth about a shameful crime committed inside our borders.
If it wasn't for a bunch of motivated policemen, the politicians would have traded the life of a child by the commodity of allowing it to go unquestioned, as was the wish of UK´s prime ministers (Blair, Gordon and now Cameron).

[Luz]

What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

That only applies in Court. When a crime happens everyone is potentially guilty.

[AnneGuedes]

If that was true, considering that the McCann and friends have never been fully investigated, and that they are the people more prone to be considered "of interest" due to the opportunity, it would show that the SY review had as primary interest to cover a crime. Let's hope that you are wrong and the SY are not so corrupt as they have been on other prominent cases.

Until proven innocent the McCann are the primary suspects.

The Met was first asked to try and find Madeleine, alive as her parents thought she was. No taxpayer would have accepted the Met spending millions of pounds searching for a body. The only chance Madeleine is alive is through abduction (I'm not horrified imagining the implications, because I'm convinced Madeleine didn't pass through that). But, even if the chances are 0,09%, let's wait and see what SY finds. And let's hope.

[Luz]

Evidence for that load of supposition please.

Evidence for the supposition that whatever the dogs signaled was planted?

[AnneGuedes]

For Portugal it would be more comfortable to consider as true the fantasy created by the McCann. A strange abductor that takes a little child away would, politically, be much easier to deal with than trying to find out the truth about a shameful crime committed inside our borders.

I agree with that. Oxala SY finds an alive perpetrator !

[AnneGuedes]

There is no evidence. I do not believe it was planted. I do believe that there is convincing scientific and observational evidence that the dog indications amount to nothing in evidentiary worth.

You've no qualification to say so. You're suggesting Prof. Harrison MBE was a clown, calling to Portugal dogs that were bound to find nothing since there were no cadaver remains in a regularly cleaned flat.

[Luz]

There is no evidence. I do not believe it was planted. I do believe that there is convincing scientific and observational evidence that the dog indications amount to nothing in evidentiary worth.

Ok. That's your belief, which I respect.
My interpretation is totally different - even though the FSS succeeded in sending a second report that contradicted the first preliminary one - the fact that the dogs signaled cadaver scent and the presence of blood in a place where never happened a death is, to say the least, alarming.

[AnneGuedes]

There was cadaver scent in the corner of the north bedroom and cadaver scent on the balcony, we don't know whether if was Madeleine's, but cadaver it was.

[Luz]

In a normal democracy it applies to anyone unconvicted. Please provide a reference for presumption of innocence only applying in court.

If Person A is suspected of a crime yet not prosecuted, he is entitled to the presumption of innocence in the whole of society Someone suggesting that they are in fact not innocent, but guilty of the crime, commits the tort of defamation.

Obviously you've never been involved in criminal investigation....
By the way, saying that a person is not proven innocent is not the same as stating he/she is guilty.

[Luz]

You assume too much.

The dogs are indicative, not probative. I am not suggesting Prof Harrison was a Clown. Stop using straw man arguments.

The fact remains that the dog evidence and DNA evidence are not considered prima facie proof of any wrong doing by either police force.

Are you a judge? Are you in a Court of Law presiding a trial or are you a ordinary person, like all of us, discussing an event and the possible explanations for what has happened?
You are very quick to accuse and judge those you dislike, sometimes ignoring legal decisions of innocence, but are very legalistic when discussing whatever is linked with the McCann.

[AnneGuedes]

You assume too much.

The dogs are indicative, not probative. I am not suggesting Prof Harrison was a Clown. Stop using straw man arguments.

The fact remains that the dog evidence and DNA evidence are not considered prima facie proof of any wrong doing by either police force.

When you'll stop being obsessed by "wrong doing", we'll have a chance to debate.
Prof Harrison MBE said the indications of the dogs were intelligence. End of.

[Luz]

Innocent until proven guilty.

OK?

Dear Neely, nobody is guilty until proven so, but one may be suspect...or not?

[Luz]

It seems the dogs are only praised and taken into account as long as they do not implicate the McCann. Until so they had a curriculum of 200 signaling situations without fail - it was necessary to come to Portugal to fail for the first time.
It seems they are still considered relevant in the US and other countries.
Poor Eddie and Keela, you can't come to Portugal or you loose your skills 

[AnneGuedes]

It seems the dogs are only praised and taken into account as long as they do not implicate the McCann. Until so they had a curriculum of 200 signaling situations without fail - it was necessary to come to Portugal to fail for the first time.
It seems they are still considered relevant in the US and other countries.
Poor Eddie and Keela, you can't come to Portugal or you loose your skills 

The amazing part, Luz, is that the Portuguese dogs confirmed the British ones. At least, on the dogs' topic, these countries can communicate ! Not bad !

[AnneGuedes]

And 'intelligence' just means evidence. Evidence can have many values. The AG and SY seem to consider the DNA and Dog evidence claimed to implicate the McCanns to be less than convincing.

No, intelligence doesn't mean evidence. Prof Harrison MBE is very clear on that topic.
Read his remarkable report.
And please try to leave the McCanns in peace !