A fresh look at Eddie the cadaver dog and those alerts.

[pegasus]

I think it was (firmly) established (following Prout's conviction) that Kate's body never was ....

Ferryman are you completely trusting of the detailed accuracy of the confession of someone who repeatedly lied?
 

[ferryman]

Ferryman are you completely trusting of the detailed accuracy of the confession of someone who repeatedly lied?

No, of course I'm not (although, having confessed to murdering Kate, I can't think why he would lie about anything else).  We're discussing whether Eddie was ever put in the Landrover.

Can't find anything to confirm either way.

[pegasus]

No, of course I'm not (although, having confessed to murdering Kate, I can't think why he would lie about anything else).  We're discussing whether Eddie was ever put in the Landrover.

Can't find anything to confirm either way.

Do you agree that after the combined pub and digging excursion, AP returned to the house?

[ferryman]

Do you agree that after the combined pub and digging excursion, AP returned to the house?

Yes, that would seem highly likely and (as I've pointed out before) it is conceivable that Prout cross-transferred a death-scent (from his clothing) to the home after burying Kate's body.

That said, I don't know what time elapsed between Prout burying Kate and the canine searches.  I wouldn't think the death-scent would be all that strong, or (in a ventilated building) last all that long.

There is a conceivable let-out clause (for the dog).  I've always acknowledged that.

I don't know whether there was an inspection of Prout's vehicle (by the dog).

Can't find anything to confirm either way.

I rather suspect that if it had been inspected, and the dog had reacted, that, too, would have gotten into the public domain, just as Eddie's alert in the house got into the public domain.

[John]

It could be that there was no contamination of the Land Rover due to the remains being wrapped in plastic and in the curtains taken from the shooting lodge.  As far as I recall the farm vehicles were all searched by the dogs early on and nothing untoward found.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9.msg12#msg12


On 5 February 2010, Adrian Prout was convicted of murdering his wife Kate and sentenced to serve a minimum of 18 years in prison.

Although Adrian and Kate were still technically married, they had in fact decided to divorce before Adrian reported her missing 5 days after he last saw her on the 5 November 2007.

Just days later, Adrian was arrested but released on bail and spent five weeks staying with Kate’s brother while the investigation carried out an extremely thorough and painstaking search of his home, farm and vehicles which were seized to be examined. Over 100 officers, a forensic team and a sniffer dog were involved but didn’t find Kate or any evidence suggesting where she could be.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article7016580.ece

[ferryman]

It could be that there was no contamination of the Land Rover due to the remains being wrapped in plastic and in the curtains taken from the shooting lodge.  As far as I recall the farm vehicles were all searched by the dogs early on and nothing untoward found.

On 5 February 2010, Adrian Prout was convicted of murdering his wife Kate and sentenced to serve a minimum of 18 years in prison.

Although Adrian and Kate were still technically married, they had in fact decided to divorce before Adrian reported her missing 5 days after he last saw her on the 5 November 2007.

Just days later, Adrian was arrested but released on bail and spent five weeks staying with Kate’s brother while the investigation carried out an extremely thorough and painstaking search of his home, farm and vehicles which were seized to be examined. Over 100 officers, a forensic team and a sniffer dog were involved but didn’t find Kate or any evidence suggesting where she could be.

That would seem to settle it.

Presumably Eddie didn't react (to the vehicle).

[ShiningInLuz]

The reliability of the dogs (whether in another case or not), the competence of the handler, and the procedures used in all the searches in the McCann case are all valid topics for debate within a dog-thread.

Provided, of course, assertions are supported by evidence, which allows the forum to debate whether the evidence cited really is evidence.

[Robittybob1]

We tend to think it is a smells we associate with cadavers that we think dogs pick up when they do a cadaver check.  I did see an experiment that showed the dogs were not smelling cadaverine.  Cadaverine and putrescine were two short chain organic molecules that would be common to all species so it makes sense that dogs like Eddie were not using these molecules to determine whether the odour had a human source.

[G-Unit]

As I understand it Eddie alerted in Jersey and an anthropologist found a fragment the anthropologist thought might be a piece of skull bone. Once found, did Eddie alert again to the fragment?

[Robittybob1]

I have spent some time listening to Richard D Hall's (RDH) documentary on MM "The True Story of Madeleine McCann. Buried By Mainstream Media ~ Richard D Hall".  He tells us that the cadaver dog alerts are intelligence and needs to be backed by supporting evidence, yet then he makes assumptions that the cadaver dogs alerts are evidence that Madeleine had died in the apartment. 
This is the complete contradiction of the original idea that the dog alerts are just intelligence.  So his whole documentary fails on that point, for it seems to rely on the fact that Madeleine had died and her parents and their friends had simulated the abduction but they in fact had got rid of the body.

Tavares' report is also based on the same faulty deduction.  RDH uses this report like it has been a proven fact but Tavares de Almeida has the same basic fault of turning intelligence into a evidential fact. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm

[ferryman]

I have spent some time listening to Richard D Hall's (RDH) documentary on MM "The True Story of Madeleine McCann. Buried By Mainstream Media ~ Richard D Hall".  He tells us that the cadaver dog alerts are intelligence and needs to be backed by supporting evidence, yet then he makes assumptions that the cadaver dogs alerts are evidence that Madeleine had died in the apartment. 
This is the complete contradiction of the original idea that the dog alerts are just intelligence.  So his whole documentary fails on that point, for it seems to rely on the fact that Madeleine had died and her parents and their friends had simulated the abduction but they in fact had got rid of the body.

Tavares' report is also based on the same faulty deduction.  RDH uses this report like it has been a proven fact but Tavares de Almeida has the same basic fault of turning intelligence into a evidential fact. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm

Tavares' report is, indeed, what most people mean and are referring to when they say Amaral's book is 'based on the files'

It's based (in large part) on Tavares' report.

It still mangles and misrepresents Harrison, Prior, the FSS and much else.

[slartibartfast]

Tavares' report is, indeed, what most people mean and are referring to when they say Amaral's book is 'based on the files'

It's based (in large part) on Tavares' report.

It still mangles and misrepresents Harrison, Prior, the FSS and much else.

IYO

[Mr Gray]

IYO

its a fact

[Mr Gray]

The reliability of the dogs (whether in another case or not), the competence of the handler, and the procedures used in all the searches in the McCann case are all valid topics for debate within a dog-thread.

Provided, of course, assertions are supported by evidence, which allows the forum to debate whether the evidence cited really is evidence.

at least everyone has to accept that the alerts are not evidence

[Alice Purjorick]

at least everyone has to accept that the alerts are not evidence

Why?
Judges in this country have allowed dog alerts as evidence.
I posted about it several months ago on here with appropriate links etc.