Do the sceptics simply misunderstand the evidence

[faithlilly]

The family are quoting the report...if you want to speculate they are lying...

Unless we actually see the report there is no way of knowing. What we do know however is that Gilroy is, despite the review, still in prison convicted of  murder, which rather suggests that the dog’s alerts were absolutely reliable.


 It is interesting though that the only individuals who ever claim that cadaver dogs are unreliable are always the ones who are on the wrong end of an alert.

[Mr Gray]

Unless we actually see the report there is no way of knowing. What we do know however is that Gilroy is, despite the review, still in prison convicted of  murder, which rather suggests that the dog’s alerts were absolutely reliable.


 It is interesting though that the only individuals who ever claim that cadaver dogs are unreliable are always the ones who are on the wrong end of an alert.

a bit like the only poeple who claim a miscarriage of justice are those who have been convicted ...are they all wrong too...


suggests is the right word ...no confirmation...and ther is evidence that the alerts were considered unreliable

[faithlilly]

a bit like the only poeple who claim a miscarriage of justice are those who have been convicted ...are they all wrong too...


suggests is the right word ...no confirmation...and ther is evidence that the alerts were considered unreliable

With no body the only evidence that Suzanne is dead are the dog alerts and Gilroy is still wallowing in prison charged with murder. You do the maths.

[Mr Gray]

With no body the only evidence that Suzanne is dead are the dog alerts and Gilroy is still wallowing in prison charged with murder. You do the maths.

on that basis ..the only evidence that maddie is dead are the alerts....once again you show how litle you understand the evidence..keep on proving me right

[Robittybob1]

With no body the only evidence that Suzanne is dead are the dog alerts and Gilroy is still wallowing in prison charged with murder. You do the maths.

Do you know this case Davel.  Was the conviction based on dog alerts?  What is the name of the case?
https://youtu.be/CA-C-2yU2D0

[faithlilly]

on that basis ..the only evidence that maddie is dead are the alerts....once again you show how litle you understand the evidence..keep on proving me right

Nail on the head Davel. Gilroy was convicted of Suzanne’s murder. The only evidence that she is dead was the cadaver dog alerts. The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction. The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission closed the case therefore they could not have found the dogs unreliable as there would then be no proof of death and no case to answer.

[Mr Gray]

Do you know this case Davel.  Was the conviction based on dog alerts?  What is the name of the case?

of course I know the case ...the conviction was not based on the dog alerts...there was lots of evidence to convict..the accused  family launched an appeal and the conviction was upheld...but theinvestigating body ruled the dog alert evidence was unreliable...but as there was so much other evidence it didnt matter...david Gilroy

[Mr Gray]

Nail on the head Davel. Gilroy was convicted of Suzanne’s murder. The only evidence that she is dead was the cadaver dog alerts. The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction. The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission closed the case therefore they could not have found the dogs unreliable as there would then be no proof of death and no case to answer.

according to the family the only criticism by the SCCRC was that the dog evidence was unreliable..if you think the only evidence she is dead are the alerts then you really do not understand the evidence

[faithlilly]

of course I know the case ...the conviction was not based on the dog alerts...there was lots of evidence to convict..the accused  family launched an appeal and the conviction was upheld...but theinvestigating body ruled the dog alert evidence was unreliable...but as there was so much other evidence it didnt matter...david Gilroy

Did you see this which I posted a couple of days ago from Crimewatch ?   ‘https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CA-C-2yU2D0

It claims ‘The key evidence came from police dogs’

The rest of the case was circumstantial, the dog alerts was the key piece of evidence that drew the other strands together into a cohesive case of murder.

BTW I didn’t think you were claiming that the dog’s were unreliable in the McCann case but merely that their alerts carried no weight.

[Mr Gray]

Did you see this which I posted a couple of days ago from Crimewatch ?   ‘https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CA-C-2yU2D0

It claims ‘The key evidence came from police dogs’

The rest of the case was circumstantial, the dog alerts was the key piece of evidence that drew the other strands together into a cohesive case of murder.

BTW I didn’t think you were claiming that the dog’s were unreliable in the McCann case but merely that their alerts carried no weight.

cite for the dog alerts were the key piece of evidence ,,,,its just your opinion....and its my opinion that the alerts in the mccann case..based on common sense...the way the dogs were repeatedly called back...the testimony of grime and harrison...are unreliable in this case

[Robittybob1]

of course I know the case ...the conviction was not based on the dog alerts...there was lots of evidence to convict..the accused  family launched an appeal and the conviction was upheld...but theinvestigating body ruled the dog alert evidence was unreliable...but as there was so much other evidence it didnt matter...david Gilroy

https://youtu.be/CA-C-2yU2D0  CRIMEWATCH. How they CAUGHT David Gilroy- Suzanne Pilley.

[Mr Gray]

https://youtu.be/CA-C-2yU2D0  CRIMEWATCH. How they CAUGHT David Gilroy- Suzanne Pilley.

are you aware of the apeal to the SCCRC...obviuosly not

the SCCRC ruled that the dog alerts were unreliable but therewas so much other evidence the conviction stood

[faithlilly]

cite for the dog alerts were the key piece of evidence ,,,,its just your opinion....and its my opinion that the alerts in the mccann case..based on common sense...the way the dogs were repeatedly called back...the testimony of grime and harrison...are unreliable in this case

Have you watched the video ? It is not my opinion that the dog alerts were the key piece of evidence, I’m quoting from the programme.

Your last sentence ( actually can you write in proper sentences with proper punctuation ) is very close to libel. Grime called Eddie back because he recognised his change in behaviour around places and objects related to the McCanns.

It’s odd how you suggest that Grime is unprofessional on the one hand yet quote him as if his word is law on the other.

[faithlilly]

are you aware of the apeal to the SCCRC...obviuosly not

the SCCRC ruled that the dog alerts were unreliable but therewas so much other evidence the conviction stood

Until you post exactly what the SCCRC said we have only a distraught family’s, who may have misunderstood, word for it.

[Mr Gray]

Have you watched the video ? It is not my opinion that the dog alerts were the key piece of evidence, I’m quoting from the programme.

Your last sentence ( actually can you write in proper sentences with proper punctuation ) is very close to libel. Grime called Eddie back because he recognised his change in behaviour around places and objects related to the McCanns.

It’s odd how you suggest that Grime is unprofessional on the one hand yet quote him as if his word is law on the other.

I have never sugested grime was unprofessional...my posts are all here...you again obviously dont understand the evidence.. Grime repeatedly called eddie back to places he had ignored.