Have the dog alerts any significance?

[Angelo222]

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

So Scotland Yard have spent £10 million for nothing iyo?

[stephen25000]

I'm afraid to say Gerry McCann was talking put of his derreiere when referring to the non-reliability of dogs, and his comment to Sandra in that infamous interview said it all.

[Brietta]

If the dog's alerts were conclusive "evidence" why did the Portuguese Prosecutors dismiss it out of hand instead of laying charges against Madeleine's parents and proceeding to trial on the strength of it?

[Mr Gray]

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

#grime tells us that the alerts are not reliable evidence...fact

[Mr Gray]

Did you say "EVIDENCE"?   

yes i said evidence....did you read the post ...the dogs are used to find evidence....

[Mr Gray]

I'm afraid to say Gerry McCann was talking put of his derreiere when referring to the non-reliability of dogs, and his comment to Sandra in that infamous interview said it all.

gerry was absolutely right and the irony in his statement has obviously gone right over your head

[G-Unit]

If the dog's alerts were conclusive "evidence" why did the Portuguese Prosecutors dismiss it out of hand instead of laying charges against Madeleine's parents and proceeding to trial on the strength of it?

The prosecutors saw the alerts as raising 'founded suspicions' of the McCanns which led 'inexorably' to them being made  arguidos, they did not dismiss them out of hand;

Confronted with these elements, namely the possibility of the existence of a cadaver in the apartment and in the vehicle that was used by the parents, founded suspicions of their involvement were raised.

As they were summoned to depose again, while there was no plausible explanation for those situations and as they were to be confronted with the dogs' findings and with the lab information, which were susceptible of rendering them responsible as authors of crimes (at least, of neglectful homicide and of concealment of a cadaver), they were, obligatorily and inexorably, made arguidos,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

[Mr Gray]

The prosecutors saw the alerts as raising 'founded suspicions' of the McCanns which led 'inexorably' to them being made  arguidos, they did not dismiss them out of hand;

Confronted with these elements, namely the possibility of the existence of a cadaver in the apartment and in the vehicle that was used by the parents, founded suspicions of their involvement were raised.

As they were summoned to depose again, while there was no plausible explanation for those situations and as they were to be confronted with the dogs' findings and with the lab information, which were susceptible of rendering them responsible as authors of crimes (at least, of neglectful homicide and of concealment of a cadaver), they were, obligatorily and inexorably, made arguidos,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

what lab information would that be...total rubbish

[Angelo222]

thank you for confirming that talking out of your backside is an acceptable phrase on this forum


you are talking out of your backside......the alerts themselves are not reliable evidence

Is any evidence reliable?  The alerts are fact and as such are evidence.  What interpretation is thereafter put on that evidence depends on the other evidence found.  In the Maddie case no other evidence has been establish but that can change over time.

[stephen25000]

in you limited opinion

he is neither arrogant nor stupid in mine

Don't you  mean 'your' opinion .

[stephen25000]

Is any evidence reliable?  The alerts are fact and as such are evidence.  What interpretation is thereafter put on that evidence depends on the other evidence found.  In the Maddie case no other evidence has been establish but that can change over time.

Indeed.

However, if a body was discovered....

[Mr Gray]

Is any evidence reliable?  The alerts are fact and as such are evidence.  What interpretation is thereafter put on that evidence depends on the other evidence found.  In the Maddie case no other evidence has been establish but that can change over time.

according to grime the alerts are not reliable evidence as they stand.....

[Angelo222]

#grime tells us that the alerts are not reliable evidence...fact

The term is evidence reliability but that was based on what was known ten years ago.  Modern forensics could change all that.

[Angelo222]

The prosecutors saw the alerts as raising 'founded suspicions' of the McCanns which led 'inexorably' to them being made  arguidos, they did not dismiss them out of hand;

Confronted with these elements, namely the possibility of the existence of a cadaver in the apartment and in the vehicle that was used by the parents, founded suspicions of their involvement were raised.

As they were summoned to depose again, while there was no plausible explanation for those situations and as they were to be confronted with the dogs' findings and with the lab information, which were susceptible of rendering them responsible as authors of crimes (at least, of neglectful homicide and of concealment of a cadaver), they were, obligatorily and inexorably, made arguidos,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

I couldn't have put it better thus the alerts were evidence allbethey uncorroborated.

[Mr Gray]

I couldn't have put it better thus the alerts were evidence allbethey uncorroborated.

#that post mentions lab information...there was none its pure bs