Eddie and Keela and what the alerts meant if anything.

[slartibartfast]

I'm not sure that the distinction is between cooked and raw.

According to Grime, Eddie wouldn't react to foodstuffs "designed for human consumption" and therefore wouldn't be fazed by sniffing out a restaurant, for example.

However, there is a semantic argument over what is meant by "designed".

1. The processes used by slaughterhouses? (That doesn't make much sense to me, as the dogs don't need the entire carcass to react.)

Or

2. Fit for human consumption? (A rotting bit of pork that had been hanging around for weeks, cooked or not, is hardly fit / designed for human consumption.)

Try reading...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_slaughter

You get an inkling of the difference between a dead pig and pork.

[Carew]

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

"There were no alert indications from the remaining properties. I did however
 see the dog search in the kitchen waste bins. These contained meat
 foodstuffs including pork and did not result in any false alert response. "


Would all the speculation about conscious or unconscious cuing by the handler include " reverse cuing" then?

I mean...........how would a handler unconsciously or otherwise prevent the dog from alerting incessantly, right, left and centre to any site in which pork products have been present ?

[Brietta]

Maybe he was hungry. He never alerted.

The point you are not getting is that picking up tennis balls to play with ... picking up soft toys to play with ... picking up food detritus for whatever ... is way ... way ... outwith the parameters of his training.

[lordpookles]

Guys you are nitpicking too much - bacon sandwiches plus deviating from the task at hand seems desperate though I concede you certainly have valid points which should be addressed. Yet, why is no one theorisng what these alerts could mean when we hypothetically consider the alerts were indeed to a cadaver? Or is this just a point scoring competition in our favourite religion?. The point is imo - both dogs gave multiple alerts. In the case of the multiple cadaver alerts we simply do not know exactly what Eddie alerted to but it is suggestive of cadaver odour(I fully concede the alerts may be absouloutely meaningless). Why don't we consider what that may mean? No one ever seems to want to other then sceptics for obvious reasons I guess. Maybe we might get a little closer to the truth if we do rather then letting that particular void being filled with just sceptic conclusions? After all its simply an exploration of information available... Finally do believers here think if the dog alerts were genuine it can only mean the McCanns are responsible? I genuinely have an open mind here regarding the alerts in general...

[Eleanor]

I suspect, but I do not actually know, that any Pig "Meat" used in dog Training would come from uneviscerated pig.  That means ungutted  and left to lie to develop a cadaver scent, as would a dead human cadaver.

[pathfinder73]

The fact is the dogs are regularly tested. If they gave false alerts they would be no longer doing the job. FBI wouldn't use dogs that can't perform their job correctly. They don't pay them high costs for being wrong. Eddie's record speaks for itself. He alerted to cadaver odour but corroborating evidence is required.

[misty]

The fact is the dogs are regularly tested. If they gave false alerts they would be no longer doing the job. FBI wouldn't use dogs that can't perform their job correctly. They don't pay them high costs for being wrong. Eddie's record speaks for itself. He alerted to cadaver odour but corroborating evidence is required.

Who tested Eddie? The UK - who don't use human remains - or the US/another facility which does use human remains?
How many places that Eddie indicated were corroborating forensics pertaining to Madeleine found?

[Brietta]

Who tested Eddie? The UK - who don't use human remains - or the US/another facility which does use human remains?
How many places that Eddie indicated were corroborating forensics pertaining to Madeleine found?

Eddie was seven when he worked in PDL and his frenetic behaviour is something which I find quite extreme and bizarre.

One thing which is absolutely certain is that no corroborating forensics were recovered from anywhere that Eddie Eddie had been in PDL.  That includes the passageway outside apartment 5a where he was overcome by excitement and eagerness to get access to the building ... really bizarre behaviour.

We are all familiar with the tongue hanging out and panting which dominates the sound track of the videos;  to those of us familiar with a domestic animal that response indicates over excitement or over heating.

**snip
Dog panting is normal after a play session, exposure to a stressful situation, anxiety or in dealing with pain. There are other reasons they could be panting from and these need your prompt attention. Any of the following…

 Heat Stroke – will cause panting in dogs to an excessive degree. If a dog is in a hot car or running around for a long time in hot weather, their body temperature can rise to over 104 degrees Fahrenheit and that is dangerous. This can lead to brain damage and death. Heat stroke can also be recognized by excessive drooling, deep red gums and tongue, weakness, and vomiting. You need to cool your dog off quickly.

http://www.health-for-dogs.com/why-is-my-dog-panting


Before his entry to apartment 5a ... Eddie had been cooped up in a van in a Portuguese summer.

**snip
A variety of factors, however, mediate the strength of the death odor and how quickly it dissipates. Temperature, humidity, the softness or hardness of the ground, and the amount of degrading matter all play a role, as does the physiology of the dog. (A heavily panting pooch can’t scent very well.)

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2012/04/etan_patz_search_renewed_can_cadaver_dogs_smell_30_year_old_corpses_.html

**snip
“Some dogs are picking up on skeletonized remains that are two feet deep,” Jacobi said. “We’re talking about locating one human vertebrae in a forest about 100 by 75 yards. That’s a huge area, and that’s amazing.” The initial research also indicated allowing dogs to rest in an air-conditioned setting prior to a trial improved the results. A panting dog is a dog that is not sniffing, Jacobi said.

http://dialog.ua.edu/2001/09/professor-mcnair-scholar-study-effectiveness-of-dogs-used-to-find-the-dead/


The fondness Eddie displayed for lifting items in his mouth and throwing them, shaking them and on occasion playing with them ... is very probably an indication that Eddie was well past his sell by date as a VRD by the time he worked in PDL  and should have been retired.

[Brietta]

Who tested Eddie? The UK - who don't use human remains - or the US/another facility which does use human remains?
How many places that Eddie indicated were corroborating forensics pertaining to Madeleine found?

There was a police accreditation scheme in place for dogs and handlers in the UK, Misty.  It certainly did not involve using human remains in training.

[jassi]

If it was an accreditation scheme, them it must have been deemed acceptable procedure

[pathfinder73]

Who tested Eddie? The UK - who don't use human remains - or the US/another facility which does use human remains?
How many places that Eddie indicated were corroborating forensics pertaining to Madeleine found?

Grime's dogs got top marks at FBI body farm. Why do you think they employed him? New forensics next.

"U.K., A.C.P.O. licensed and accredited cadaver dogs are trained and licensed
on the basis of the relevant section of the Police Dog Training and Care
manual. This involves the training of G.P. (General Purpose) dogs to alert to
the presence of surface deposition and sub-surface deposition to
approximately 2 feet. The dogs are deployed on long lines to search an area
in large numbers...
Both dogs and I are licensed as two separate working teams. We are
independently tested and licensed annually, normally at six monthly intervals
as a 'rolling' programme to ensure best practice is maintained. They are
tested to units of assessment prepared as a stand-alone system as these
dogs are unique."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

http://www.acpo.police.uk/documents/uniformed/2011/201103UOPDogsMoG1.1.pdf
The Police Dog guidance indicates all the criteria that, if not fulfilled, lead to suppression of the license.
It's not only the dog's ability to react correctly to human remains and only to that, it's also obedience, etc.
The basic question is "Did the team safely and successfully complete the task ?"
There are quite a few accidents with police dogs (innocent persons bitten...), hence the "safely" as well as in the case of explosives (what if a positive is missed by the dog ?).

[Brietta]

If it was an accreditation scheme, them it must have been deemed acceptable procedure

LOL ... of course it was and is ... but the point of such accreditation is that both dog and handler must have the appropriate up to date accreditation ... just a bit like your gas fitter ... no hard copy gas certificate ... no ability to connect you to the mains although having the knowledge and the skills to do so.

I'm sure you will manage a further non sequitur, if you do, provide a cite with it.

[Carana]

I suspect, but I do not actually know, that any Pig "Meat" used in dog Training would come from uneviscerated pig.  That means ungutted  and left to lie to develop a cadaver scent, as would a dead human cadaver.

They no doubt do use whole dead piglets, but it wouldn't make sense to solely train them that way, IMO. Different body parts decompose at different rates and present different "bouquets" (and even these evolve over time).  If a dog could only detect a whole cadaver, it wouldn't be much use in a murder investigation involving a chopped-up body discarded in several locations, for example.

[jassi]

LOL ... of course it was and is ... but the point of such accreditation is that both dog and handler must have the appropriate up to date accreditation ... just a bit like your gas fitter ... no hard copy gas certificate ... no ability to connect you to the mains although having the knowledge and the skills to do so.

I'm sure you will manage a further non sequitur, if you do, provide a cite with it.

Are you saying that the dogs weren't accredited to a satisfactory standard?

[Brietta]

They no doubt do use whole dead piglets, but it wouldn't make sense to solely train them that way, IMO. Different body parts decompose at different rates and present different "bouquets" (and even these evolve over time).  If a dog could only detect a whole cadaver, it wouldn't be much use in a murder investigation involving a chopped-up body discarded in several locations, for example.

There is absolutely no doubt whatsoever that dogs' noses are probably among the most sophisticated sniffing instrument not known to science.

We all know they work ... science can't give a definitive answer as to how they work and science can't tell us what information the dog is taking in through the nose ... but they are working on it.

There is also the question of reliability to be addressed with some dogs performing well under test circumstances and others not so well ... so until results can be consistent and capable of replication to the highest scientific standard ... an indication will remain just that.

**snip

It would be interesting to conduct a study with a lot of dogs and multiple target scents, with lots of samples for training and, where possible, a real test in the end, with real cows, people, mould etc.

Surprisingly, there are relatively few peer-reviewed scientific studies on the training and use of detection dogs.

Clearly, dogs are used very successfully in several fields without the performance (or publication) of scientific studies.

However, it would be desirable for more rigorous studies to be carried out, particularly on training methods.

In the future, fuller understanding of the canine olfactory sense may mean electronic noses can be created to detect the identity of humans or detect cancer as sensitively as dogs, but even more reliably.

http://stud.epsilon.slu.se/6341/7/blom_m_140108.pdf

The above quote is taken from Use of dogs as odour detectorswhich was printed in 2013 so is as up to date as possible.