Wandering Off Topic

[Icanhandlethetruth]

As police teams methodically searched the area, Dawson’s team were using science to narrow the hunt.

She said: “We used gas chromatography (the process whereby the various elements of a compound are separated into their distinct parts for individual analysis) in the evidential phase of the operation and showed the peat on the soles of the Timberland boots also had the same organic profile as was found at the scene.

“Our botanist identified the individual recovered mosses. From this we knew that the person who wore the boots had likely stood in the area where Emma was found. There was also an organic peat stain on the boots which showed they had been partially submerged in peaty water.

“Puddles containing peaty water were located in the hollows between the clumps of moss and rushes at the scene. Trees had been planted around 2016 in that general area and may not have been felled for another 40 to 60 years, which might have left Emma hidden in the undergrowth.

“She was covered with clumps of mosses and the rushes which had been pulled from the ground a few metres away from her body in an attempt to conceal her.

“Soil can be distinctive in a range of chemical, physical and biological characteristics, including the soil organic profile, soil elemental composition and soil mineralogy. Depending on the type of soil, different methods are used in forensic case work. In this case, because of the organic nature of the soil, organic plant wax marker analysis was used. In addition, the distinctive plant community added another link to the scene.”

Without the police and forensic experts’ efforts Emma’s body may never have been found and her family would not have known if she was alive or dead. Dawson added: “What the police search did was to return Emma to her family and give them that at least. It would be hugely painful for them to be left without that knowledge.”
https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/emma-faulds-murder-soil-forensic/

For information
That is an example of direct forensic evidence as is the murderer's DNA found under the driver's seat of Emma's car.
Both examples of direct evidence which helped to nail a killer.

I think you may not totally understand the meaning of direct evidence and circumstantial evidence.
Direct evidence is evidence that proves a fact with no inference needed to apply to the evidence
The most common form of direct evidence is an eyewitness account of the actual crime taking place
Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on inference to prove a fact.
Forensic evidence can still be circumstantial, such as a fingerprint in a car.

“Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—such as a fingerprint at the scene of a crime.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_evidence

With that being said, the other 2 cases you mention, Pillay and Fleming, was there any direct evidence or even forensic evidence in those cases?

[Brietta]

I think you may not totally understand the meaning of direct evidence and circumstantial evidence.
Direct evidence is evidence that proves a fact with no inference needed to apply to the evidence
The most common form of direct evidence is an eyewitness account of the actual crime taking place
Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on inference to prove a fact.
Forensic evidence can still be circumstantial, such as a fingerprint in a car.

“Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—such as a fingerprint at the scene of a crime.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_evidence

With that being said, the other 2 cases you mention, Pillay and Fleming, was there any direct evidence or even forensic evidence in those cases?

I know what constitutes circumstantial evidence, thank you, and in Emma's case the direct scientific evidence was proven when the dogs were taken to the place indicated and found Emma's body.
This gave her family a measure of closure although the cause of death was unable to be established.

In both Margaret's and Suzanne's cases only inference could be made from the dogs' reaction ~ no evidence ~ and definitely no proof.
In other words - nothing.

I must say the deification of dogs has never been as prevalent since Anubis's time 😊

[Icanhandlethetruth]

I know what constitutes circumstantial evidence, thank you, and in Emma's case the direct scientific evidence was proven when the dogs were taken to the place indicated and found Emma's body.
This gave her family a measure of closure although the cause of death was unable to be established.

In both Margaret's and Suzanne's cases only inference could be made from the dogs' reaction ~ no evidence ~ and definitely no proof.
In other words - nothing.

I must say the deification of dogs has never been as prevalent since Anubis's time 😊

Exactly, inference could be drawn from this circumstantial evidence which is what a jury has to do in all cases. Pretty much the same with any other piece of circumstantial evidence, fingerprints, soil samples, an expert witness.

[Mr Gray]

Exactly, inference could be drawn from this circumstantial evidence which is what a jury has to do in all cases. Pretty much the same with any other piece of circumstantial evidence, fingerprints, soil samples, an expert witness.

you dont see the fact that Grime and harrison said in this case the alerts have no evidential reliability or value have any consequence

[G-Unit]

I know what constitutes circumstantial evidence, thank you, and in Emma's case the direct scientific evidence was proven when the dogs were taken to the place indicated and found Emma's body.
This gave her family a measure of closure although the cause of death was unable to be established.

In both Margaret's and Suzanne's cases only inference could be made from the dogs' reaction ~ no evidence ~ and definitely no proof.
In other words - nothing.

I must say the deification of dogs has never been as prevalent since Anubis's time 😊

I ask again, was just one place indicated or several? Imo there would be more than one area of bog and peat in the area and advising the searchers to look in those areas would have helped, but the dog (s) still had to locate the body. The dog alerts to the boot of the Jaguar and the discovery that the suspect drove that car to Glentrool Forest led to the search area too. It seems to me that different types of evidence helped to reconstruct the suspect's actions and to decide where best to search for the body.

[kizzy]

What is investigative intelligence worth if it doesn't lead anywhere?

OK. Let's change scenario. Someone was burgled. The victim remembered seeing someone with a grey hoodie. A witness saw an identifiable person with a grey hoodie around the vicinity at the time.

Then what?

What is investigative intelligence worth if it doesn't lead anywhere?

What do you mean like this as the germans believing  C.B. Is the abductor.


It was earlier claimed there is “concrete evidence” against Brueckner, who was in Praia da Luz, in the Algarve, at the time Madeleine vanished.

"We are missing important information. We want no stone unturned. Whether there will be an indictment in the end, I cannot foresee at the moment.”


German Madeleine McCann police still haven't spoken to parents year after naming suspect

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/german-madeleine-mccann-police-still

[Icanhandlethetruth]

you dont see the fact that Grime and harrison said in this case the alerts have no evidential reliability or value have any consequence

It didn't seem to hamper Grime giving evidence in cases in the US subsequently and he has stated at least twice that alerts can be supported by witness accounts without any forensics. Only he can explain what he meant by those statements as they are clearly false, as the evidence has been heard in court many times.

[Mr Gray]

It didn't seem to hamper Grime giving evidence in cases in the US subsequently and he has stated at least twice that alerts can be supported by witness accounts without any forensics. Only he can explain what he meant by those statements as they are clearly false, as the evidence has been heard in court many times.

So he's changed his mind.. I wonder why... That makes his opinions suspect. I wonder how much he was paid to give his witness statement in the US. It cannot be denied that Grime has a financial interest in the value of the alerts

[Icanhandlethetruth]

So he's changed his mind.. I wonder why... That makes his opinions suspect. I wonder how much he was paid to give his witness statement in the US. It cannot be denied that Grime has a financial interest in the value of the alerts

He hasn't really changed his mind as he said about the anecdotal witness thing in his personal profile letter from 2007. Maybe he was told to temper the expectations of the Portuguese concerning the alerts. Its all speculation what he meant, the fact is dog alerts are heard as evidence.
You are slightly impugning the morals and reputation of Mr Grime by suggesting he regards pecuniary gain higher than the truth, as presented before a court of law.

[Mr Gray]

He hasn't really changed his mind as he said about the anecdotal witness thing in his personal profile letter from 2007. Maybe he was told to temper the expectations of the Portuguese concerning the alerts. Its all speculation what he meant, the fact is dog alerts are heard as evidence.
You are slightly impugning the morals and reputation of Mr Grime by suggesting he regards pecuniary gain higher than the truth, as presented before a court of law.

I'm stating a fact... Grime has a financial interest in the value of the alerts. I think it's true to say their use in court is contraversial

[Brietta]

I ask again, was just one place indicated or several? Imo there would be more than one area of bog and peat in the area and advising the searchers to look in those areas would have helped, but the dog (s) still had to locate the body. The dog alerts to the boot of the Jaguar and the discovery that the suspect drove that car to Glentrool Forest led to the search area too. It seems to me that different types of evidence helped to reconstruct the suspect's actions and to decide where best to search for the body.

It seems to me that you quite simply fail to understand the information available which details the manner in which an impossible search area was narrowed down.

Much as you fail to understand the process involved in the management of victim recovery dogs and gathering evidence.

VS made an interesting observation which you chose to ignore but I too wonder how often these dogs gave false alerts in what was obviously peaty soil before the human element and forensics indicated probable territory for the deposition of remains which enabled Emma to be returned to her family for burial.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

I'm stating a fact... Grime has a financial interest in the value of the alerts. I think it's true to say their use in court is contraversial

Its good to see that you are finally coming round to the fact that alerts can and have been used in court, I will meet you halfway and say it is correct , some people view the use of these alerts as controversial, but with a rider that a lot of these people are the relatives and friends of someone convicted after such evidence is heard, ie. Gilroy, Lane et al.

By the way what did you mean with this post

“Then there's blood from a living person. Eddie will alert to this in a trace so small Keela cannot detect it"

Not sure that is correct, show me your workings

[Mr Gray]

Its good to see that you are finally coming round to the fact that alerts can and have been used in court, I will meet you halfway and say it is correct , some people view the use of these alerts as controversial, but with a rider that a lot of these people are the relatives and friends of someone convicted after such evidence is heard, ie. Gilroy, Lane et al.

By the way what did you mean with this post

“Then there's blood from a living person. Eddie will alert to this in a trace so small Keela cannot detect it"

Not sure that is correct, show me your workings

But you know all about the dogs

[Icanhandlethetruth]

But you know all about the dogs

I am sure I don't know all about the dogs, I am by no means an expert. I am always up for education, so give me a schooling.
I suspect it is something to do with your idea that Eddie alerts to diluted blood whereas Keela doesn't, which is arrant nonsense in which you have misinterpreted Grime's testimony on Eddie and Keela.

[Mr Gray]

I am sure I don't know all about the dogs, I am by no means an expert. I am always up for education, so give me a schooling.
I suspect it is something to do with your idea that Eddie alerts to diluted blood whereas Keela doesn't, which is arrant nonsense in which you have misinterpreted Grime's testimony on Eddie and Keela.

so how do you intepret what Grime said....

In order for the dog to locate the source the blood must have 'dried' in situ. Any

'wetting' once dried will not affect the dog's abilities.

Blood that is subjected to dilution by precipitation or other substantial water source

prior to drying will soak into the ground or other absorbent material. This may dilute

the scent to an unacceptable leve1 for accurate location.

It is possible however that the EVRD will locate the scent source as it would for 'dead body' scent. Forensic testing may not produce evidence but any alert may provide
intelligence to support other factors in the investigation of a crime.