Wandering Off Topic

[Mr Gray]

Just been listening to a new review of the Suzanne Pilley case.  It has professor John Cassella of Staffordshire University who is quite dismissive if the dog alerts and says they should not have been admitted as evidence.  It also says the SCCRC ruled that the alerts should not have been admitted.  That's quite damning here to posters who still support the value of the alerts

For those who are not aware John Cassella is a colleague of Martin Grime

[Eleanor]

Happy Christmas, Y'all.

This a Community you know, whether you like it or not.  The Community, I mean.  I can think of something worth defending about all of you if pushed and if any of you were being attacked from outside.

And most of us have been at this for quite some time.

God knows what I would have done with myself for the last twelve years without it, especially the lonesome years.

[Wonderfulspam]

Just been listening to a new review of the Suzanne Pilley case.  It has professor John Cassella of Staffordshire University who is quite dismissive if the dog alerts and says they should not have been admitted as evidence.  It also says the SCRC ruled that the alerts should not have been admitted.  That's quite damning here to posters who still support the value of the alerts

For those who are not aware John Cassella is a colleague of Martin Grime

What would really be damning is if Suzanne turns up alive safe & well.

Who knows, maybe 2020 will be the year her & Jeanette Zapata go public.

[Robittybob1]

Just been listening to a new review of the Suzanne Pilley case.  It has professor John Cassella of Staffordshire University who is quite dismissive if the dog alerts and says they should not have been admitted as evidence.  It also says the SCRC ruled that the alerts should not have been admitted.  That's quite damning here to posters who still support the value of the alerts

For those who are not aware John Cassella is a colleague of Martin Grime

So what was the source Davel?   Is there any chance of the link to the podcast? 

[Wonderfulspam]

So what was the source Davel?   Is there any chance of the link to the podcast?

And while he's at it, could he tell us what he thinks happened to Suzanne Pilley, if Gilroy didn't kill her?

[Mr Gray]

And while he's at it, could he tell us what he thinks happened to Suzanne Pilley, if Gilroy didn't kill her?

from what Ive read I think he did kill her

[Mr Gray]

So what was the source Davel?   Is there any chance of the link to the podcast?

https://www.audible.co.uk/pd/Body-of-Proof-Audiobook/B07WPCMH3C

[Wonderfulspam]

from what Ive read I think he did kill her

No, I think maybe he had an addiction to inhaling air fresheners.

It was coincidence that he stopped texting her after she disappeared & he liked wearing make up on his hands.

[Mr Gray]

No, I think maybe he had an addiction to inhaling air fresheners.

It was coincidence that he stopped texting her after she disappeared & he liked wearing make up on his hands.

As the SCCRC said ...the dog alerts should have been inadmissible ...but there was enough evidence to convict him anyway. Im just making the point to those who celebrated the admissibility of the alerts...even Grimes own colleague...professor Cassella  said they should not have been admitted and raised questions about their accuracy

[Wonderfulspam]

As the SRCC said ...the dog alerts should have been inadmissible ...but there was enough evidence to convict him anyway. Im just making the point to those who celebrated the admissibility of the alerts...even Grimes own colleague...professor Cassella  said they should not have been admitted and raised questions about their accuracy

I wonder what Prof Cassella thinks happened to Suzanne then.  Maybe she's still hiding in a broom cupboard at work.

[Mr Gray]

I wonder what Prof Cassella thinks happened to Suzanne then.  Maybe she's still hiding in a broom cupboard at work.

Prof Cassellla is an expert on the dogs...perhaps the defence should have called him. I can undestand why you want to deflect away from his opinion. Almeida said the main evidence against the mcccanns were the dog alerts...makes the PJ look more than a little foolish


Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida said he believed the British child had died in her family's apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on the day she went missing. He told the court the main evidence for this was the findings of British police sniffer dogs sent to Portugal to examine the flat. The McCanns' lawyer, Isabel Duarte, challenged this claim, arguing that the results from sniffer dogs did not constitute proof and were not allowed as evidence in the case.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jan/12/madeleine-mccann-parents-defamation-book

[Wonderfulspam]

Prof Cassellla is an expert on the dogs...perhaps the defence should have called him. I can undestand why you want to deflect away from his opinion. Almeida said the main evidence against the mcccanns were the dog alerts...makes the PJ look more than a little foolish


Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida said he believed the British child had died in her family's apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on the day she went missing. He told the court the main evidence for this was the findings of British police sniffer dogs sent to Portugal to examine the flat. The McCanns' lawyer, Isabel Duarte, challenged this claim, arguing that the results from sniffer dogs did not constitute proof and were not allowed as evidence in the case.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jan/12/madeleine-mccann-parents-defamation-book

It's obvious Suzanne Pilley is dead, that's the dog alerts corroborated IMO

[Mr Gray]

It's obvious Suzanne Pilley is dead, that's the dog alerts corroborated IMO

its not Prof Cassellas opinion....and hes the expert.

[Wonderfulspam]

its not Prof Cassellas opinion....and hes the expert.

So does he explain what happened to Suzanne at all?

I mean, if the cadaver dog alerts are wrong then she must be alive, right?

[Mr Gray]

So does he explain what happened to Suzanne at all?

I mean, if the cadaver dog alerts are wrong then she must be alive, right?

no....theres enough real evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt shes dead ...the alerts arent part of that evidence

thats not my opinion...its the opinion of the appeal court