Cuddlecat and those claimed alerts.

[John]

What the Portuguese said of the Cuddlecat and the sideboard episode.

This event is referred to in the second Report made by a team of independent analysts from the Central Department of Criminal Investigation (Central Division of Information Analysis - PJ), dated from February 2008.

Snip

From the screening of the videos, referred previously, done when the dogs were working, some doubts arise. We don't want and we can't take the place of the trainer, we only wish to alert, with this paragraph, to some facts, that according to us, need further clarification.

If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times'

On one of the films, it's possible to see that 'Eddie' sniffs Madeleine's cuddle cat, more than once, bites it, throws it into the air and only after the toy is hidden does he 'mark' it (page 2099). Why didn't he signal it when he sniffs it on the first time'

Apart from all that was said about the dogs, we must also take into attention the results of the forensic analysis that was performed by the experts on the Scientific Police Laboratory on the day immediately after the facts, and already mentioned where no vestige of blood was found.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/OUSTROS_APENSOS_11_VOLUMES.htm

[John]

Can someone remind me what evidence there is of two identical toys, ta
As far as I know the mccanns removed all their belongings from the flat when vacating

None whatsoever, CC was only ever taken away for a few hours to do the gymnasium inspections!    Another myth debunked?

[John]

It just doesn't make sense that cadaver odour would still be present on Cuddle Cat  3 months later and after a thorough laundering.
Could it have been a tactic to force an admission out of the McCanns?  We don't see an unbroken chain of evidence. There are no clear photos of CC appearing in the video.  There are too many shots that emphasise the soft toy, it is as if there is some sort of foreknowledge by the photographer. There are multiple attempts to get a reaction from Eddie the cadaver dog yet the same emphasis is not on other items eg the pink blanket. and yet they are side by side with Madeleine on that bed that night. The blanket would not have been washed or was it?

You could say the same about the dog inspections in the underground garage.

Q. To which car was Eddie called back several times?
A. McCann hire car.

Q. Several cars were identified for testing yet only one had an interior inspection. Which one?
A. McCann hire car.

Q. Did examiner know which car related to McCann family?
A. One car had Find Madeleine posters on its side rear windows.  The McCann hire car.


Nice bit of work.  Not!!

[misty]

I must say misty, I found that particular event somewhat puzzling.  I know Sadie has spent a lot of time commenting on this and referring to what was on top of the sideboard and not what was in it.  That said and having viewed the non edited video at length some time ago it is clear that this was all preplanned.  After Eddie had his fun with Cuddlecat on the lounge floor he (Eddie) was taken into the bedrooms by Grime.  While this was happening some kind guy (English or Portuguese) lifted CC and placed him on the bottom shelf of said sideboard leaving the door ever so slightly ajar.  Back comes Grime and Eddie and makes an alert at the opposite end of said sideboard.  What that was supposed to show is anyone's guess but an alert to Cuddlecat it was not!

The Cuddlecat in the sideboard sequence must be the most tragic representation ever of a cadaver dog supposedely alerting to a target.  Even the Portuguese questioned the competence of such an episode.


Video: > Eddie in McCann's rented villa.

The sequence from 02.17 finds us back in the bedroom again and with attention yet again being drawn towards the bedside wardrobe.   Grime opens the door of the wardrobe to let Eddie in and some 20 seconds later out he comes without making any response.  Grime puts a pink towel back in which Eddie had displaced.




From 03.50 Eddie then goes into the lounge area again and starts barking in front of a sideboard after sniffing what was on top of it.




Grime then summons the dog back into the bedroom again and the bedside wardrobe.  Again, Eddie shows no interest and leaves before being called back yet again.

Again the dog wanders off and is called back for what must be the umpteenth time.  Again no response.

From 05.30 Grime then takes the dog back to the lounge and sits him down.  He goes to the sideboard at which the dog had earlier reacted by barking and opens it to find Cuddle Cat on the lower shelf.



Grime holds Cuddle cat up for the camera as if it was some sort of trophy.  A job well done?  NOT!!

It's the sequence starting at 4.12 which is the more relevant, John (as cleverly spotted by Pegasus).
What did the handler do when he walked part way around the table - we can't see.
Watch for Eddie's head appearing very briefly above the table top. The subsequent definite alert is beside the chair with its seat obscured, adjacent to the far cupboard. Eddie is not remotely interested in those cupboards but it is clear the handler was expecting to find CC in them.

[John]

It's the sequence starting at 4.12 which is the more relevant, John (as cleverly spotted by Pegasus).
What did the handler do when he walked part way around the table - we can't see.
Watch for Eddie's head appearing very briefly above the table top. The subsequent definite alert is beside the chair with its seat obscured, adjacent to the far cupboard. Eddie is not remotely interested in those cupboards but it is clear the handler was expecting to find CC in them.

Eddie had CC in his mouth and was playing with him in the first part of the video. There is a break in the video immediately after this sequence, no doubt it was discussed what to do next.  My own suspicion is that CC was placed on top of the sideboard out of reach of the dog while these discussions were happening. Later CC is put into the sideboard and Eddie brought back.  First he shows immediate interest in the top of the sideboard (having previously not done so) and then the cupboard beneath, both locations I suspect CC to have been placed. Eddie found CC, he was not alerting to any clandestine odour imo.

My own view is that this exercise was a complete shambles!

[John]

This thread has now been purged of unsupported speculations.

[Robittybob1]

It has been suggested that original CC was bagged up & kept by the PJ & new CC featured in all subsequent events.

@ Misty who made that suggestion do you know?  I think it sounds more advanced that what I had proposed.

[John]

@ Misty who made that suggestion do you know?  I think it sounds more advanced that what I had proposed.

Mr Grime is on record requesting that CC be taken for forensic analysis but it appears this never happened.  Obviously the PJ weren't as convinced as some later speculated.

[misty]

@ Misty who made that suggestion do you know?  I think it sounds more advanced that what I had proposed.

I rather thought it was you, although perhaps I have embellished a little. I think most of us are having a little difficulty ascertaining where reality crosses over into changelings & Toy Story from your musings.

[Robittybob1]

I rather thought it was you, although perhaps I have embellished a little. I think most of us are having a little difficulty ascertaining where reality crosses over into changelings & Toy Story from your musings.

When I came across the quote I'm now using in my signature "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth" I felt that is the logic I have applied in developing the new theory. 
I have eliminated the impossible, and what resulted was rather improbable, but it was the only option left, so is it the truth as Conan Doyle said.

[ groundless speculation removed ]

[ferryman]

Mr Grime is on record requesting that CC be taken for forensic analysis but it appears this never happened.  Obviously the PJ weren't as convinced as some later speculated.

More likely Grime was embarrassed at being asked if the fiasco with the toy was (sic) a trick of the dog.

Grime ought to have been embarrassed by the whole darned thing.

All that came of it was the canard that Eddie scented death on the toy.

[John]

More likely Grime was embarrassed at being asked if the fiasco with the toy was (sic) a trick of the dog.

Grime ought to have been embarrassed by the whole darned thing.

All that came of it was the canard that Eddie scented death on the toy.

I actually agree with you on this one, it wasn't his finest hour.

[Robittybob1]

I rather thought it was you, although perhaps I have embellished a little. I think most of us are having a little difficulty ascertaining where reality crosses over into changelings & Toy Story from your musings.

The other criteria I applied was to allow everyone's statement to be nearly the truth.  They will tell the truth but not the whole truth.
I took it there would have been intelligence supplied to the PJ that is verbal and not released (like the anonymous Crimestoppers line) so the PJ would be nearly right but not quite.  That is not speculation in a way because it always happens, but I can't speculate what they knew or who it was that told them this information.
So when two or more statements don't agree there is the sign of one telling the truth but the others hiding something.
I was also allowing for everyone to behave unusually but with no criminal intent. 
Can all this happen without anyone committing a major crime?  Well at least less than murder or kidnapping.
 

[ferryman]

The other criteria I applied was to allow everyone's statement to be nearly the truth.  They will tell the truth but not the whole truth.
I took it there would have been intelligence supplied to the PJ that is verbal and not released (like the anonymous Crimestoppers line) so the PJ would be nearly right but not quite.  That is not speculation in a way because it always happens, but I can't speculate what they knew or who it was that told them this information.
So when two or more statements don't agree there is the sign of one telling the truth but the others hiding something.
I was also allowing for everyone to behave unusually but with no criminal intent. 
Can all this happen without anyone committing a major crime?  Well at least less than murder or kidnapping.

Not sure I'd particularly agree with the part I underline. 

Human memory is fallible.

Different people are bound to have different recollections and memories of the same event.

Doesn't mean that any are lying.  All are trying (to the best of their ability) to recall and relate events as they remember them.

But there are bound to be variations in memory recall.

I think, when all accounts from separate sources are identical, you should begin to suspect collusion.

Nothing like that appears to apply in witnesses statements in PdL; the variations entirely normal and to be expected in circumstances such as those that gave rise to the exercise of taking the statements.

[misty]

Not sure I'd particularly agree with the part I underline. 

Human memory is fallible.

Different people are bound to have different recollections and memories of the same event.

Doesn't mean that any are lying.  All are trying (to the best of their ability) to recall and relate events as they remember them.

But there are bound to be variations in memory recall.

I think, when all accounts from separate sources are identical, you should begin to suspect collusion.

Nothing like that appears to apply in witnesses statements in PdL; the variations entirely normal and to be expected in circumstances such as those that gave rise to the exercise of taking the statements.

Have you been watching the MWT documentary on the disappearance of Veronica Packman?