Have the dog alerts any significance?

[stephen25000]

An amazing study was done in NZ by a farmer.  He recorded dog barks and learned how to talk back to the dogs in their own language and he was able to tell them what to do and then let them go and do it. 
It was a lot easier than having to whistle at them all the time.

I would like to see a link to this study.

[Robittybob1]

I would like to see a link to this study.

It was covered on Country Calendar  I'll see if I find a link.  I'm sure it wasn't a prank.
There seems to be no way to Google it.

[Mr Gray]

Medicine is not static, it is on a learning curve.

The statement by Gerry Mccann as regards the dogs is quite laughable.

Dogs are used all around the world in a variety of locations and for a variety of different services.

dogs are used all round the world to find evidence....thats their value
gerry is absolutely right and your comments are laughable

[Mr Gray]

A comprehensive analysis would need top be  made, to discuss how effective dogs are in these circumstances.

However, bottom line.

The dogs will do what they are trained to do, and do not have an agenda.

bottom line is the dogs have never been properly tested....that is the severe weakness in any argument trying to support the alerts

[Mr Gray]

a drug dog alerts to a container.....the container is opened and evidence found....result evidence for prosecution

drug dog alerts to container .....no evidence found....no action can be taken

the alert itself is not evidence but a reason to look for evidence in that container

[G-Unit]

your post shows your total ignorance of the facts and your problems with people who are plainly far more intelligent than you

medicine is supported by millions of scientific studies.....as regards the dogs alerts there seems to virually no proper scientific studies

in her degree kate will have been trained to appraise studies in a scientific manner....your post is so far off the mark it shows your complete lack of knowledge and understanding of what medicine and a medical gegree consists of

I'm intelligent enough to know what a 'science' is, which is why I agree with Richard Smith, the editor of the BMJ in 2004.

One of medicine's biggest successes in recent years is it's work on smoking. They cannot, however, prove that smoking causes harm to people's health. They cannot predict that smokers will develop certain diseases as a result of smoking.

Science, for me, includes the kind of predictability which tells us that an apple falling from a tree will always, without fail, fall to the ground. Medicine has very rarely reached that level of scientific rigour.

[G-Unit]

a drug dog alerts to a container.....the container is opened and evidence found....result evidence for prosecution

drug dog alerts to container .....no evidence found....no action can be taken

the alert itself is not evidence but a reason to look for evidence in that container

When no evidence is found do the police;

Humbly apologise to the owner of the container for their dog's mistake?

Conclude that drugs were in the container previously and make a mental note to keep an eye on the owner of the container in future?

[Robittybob1]

a drug dog alerts to a container.....the container is opened and evidence found....result evidence for prosecution

drug dog alerts to container .....no evidence found....no action can be taken

the alert itself is not evidence but a reason to look for evidence in that container

If this line happens too often the dog is replaced: "drug dog alerts to container .....no evidence found....no action can be taken".

[Mr Gray]

When no evidence is found do the police;

Humbly apologise to the owner of the container for their dog's mistake?

Conclude that drugs were in the container previously and make a mental note to keep an eye on the owner of the container in future?

the point i am making is the alert itself is of no evidentilal value

[G-Unit]

the point i am making is the alert itself is of no evidentilal value

Nevertheless it arouses suspicion and affects how police view those associated with the container. The alerts in the Prout and Zapatta cases had no evidential value, but they pointed the police in the right direction. 

[Angelo222]

#no they dont because the alerts are not deemed to be reliable and their is no independent verification to say they are. I would say based on the available evidence taht none of the alerts in pdl related to maddie

For once you are talking nonsense.  Certainly dog handlers and especially police dog handlers give evidence in court.  Hasn't Mr Grime told us as much too?

[Angelo222]

Training and reliability comes into it.  Some dogs might be unreliable, but Martin claims Eddie was very reliable.

OK I agree with Davel - this does not point to Madeleine.  The alert does not have a name on it.  Unless you are willing to allow for another cadaver though it gets real tricky to explain it in your own mind.

Davel in his desperation to protection his own point of view appears to be confusing evidence with proof of a crime.

[Angelo222]

grime has stated the alerts have no evidential value...i understand what that means but it seems most of this forum do not

You forgot the "on their own" bit.  If corroborative evidence is found of a crime that former stance will fall to dust.

[Mr Gray]

You forgot the "on their own" bit.  If corroborative evidence is found of a crime that former stance will fall to dust.

If
But no sign in 10 years and the investigation closing
Get real

[Angelo222]

dogs are used all round the world to find evidence....thats their value
gerry is absolutely right and your comments are laughable

Did you say "EVIDENCE"?