Unsolved Madeleine McCann

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

CANINE SEARCH OF MR McCANN'S VILLA, PRESENT OCCUPANCY.

The villa interior, garden, and all property within were searched by the EVRD.
The only alert indication given was when the dog located a pink cuddly toy in
the villas lounge. The CSI dog did not alert to the toy when screened
separately.

09-Processo 9 pages 2473 to 2483

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm#mg2473

Mr Grime:

It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to cadaver scent
contamination. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this
alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.
 
The grimes link on the PJ files...it may have been me thta used words scent, meaning both alerted to blood
 
muratfan said:
The grimes link on the PJ files...it may have been me thta used words scent, meaning both alerted to blood
Click to expand...

So you are no longer claiming that they react to 'body scent'. sorry to be so insistent, but this is how myths arise unless we remain extremely vigilant and embrace scepticism.

It does show that I am not being unfair to Mr Bennett- only asking you to do the ame as I am asking him.

Thanks and sorry.
 
Mr Bennett still frit it appears.

Any reasonable person might believe that his unwillingness to support his contentions about the dogs indicates his INABILITY to support them- that they might have a validity much lower than 100%.

It is now over a week since I asked him the simple questions, and still he evades, avoids and obfuscates.
 
debunker said:
So you are no longer claiming that they react to 'body scent'. sorry to be so insistent, but this is how myths arise unless we remain extremely vigilant and embrace scepticism.

It does show that I am not being unfair to Mr Bennett- only asking you to do the ame as I am asking him.

Thanks and sorry.
Click to expand...


Both alert to blood... Eddie to both cavadar and blood.
 
inspectorfrost wrote on the Jill Havern forum ('Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann') tonight:

QUOTE

I read the [Australian] football forum Madeleine thread and wondered why so many McCann supporters appear so rabid and intransigent. There is something seriously wrong with some of them.
742129.gif


I also wondered why some keep bleating on and on that the cadaver dog reacts to blood, when the blood dog confirmed it was not blood on several occasions?
2699404744.gif

UNQUOTE

Not only do I agree with the Inspector, but his answer saves me some time in answering most of the questions on here about what each dog alerts to.

inspectorfrost has conveniently provided a concise answer

Simple: the human corpse dog alerts to human corpse scent; the blood dog alerts to blood. That is why both are used. I have said as much already on this thread.
 
Tony Bennett said:
inspectorfrost wrote on the Jill Havern forum ('Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann') tonight:

QUOTE

I read the [Australian] football forum Madeleine thread and wondered why so many McCann supporters appear so rabid and intransigent. There is something seriously wrong with some of them.
742129.gif


I also wondered why some keep bleating on and on that the cadaver dog reacts to blood, when the blood dog confirmed it was not blood on several occasions?
2699404744.gif

UNQUOTE

Not only do I agree with the Inspector, but his answer saves me some time in answering most of the questions on here about what each dog alerts to.

inspectorfrost has conveniently provided a concise answer

Simple: the human corpse dog alerts to human corpse scent; the blood dog alerts to blood. That is why both are used. I have said as much already on this thread.
Click to expand...

'When the blood dog confirmed it wasn't blood on several occasions'

Can you please be more specific and clarify when these several occasions were and how did Keela (blood dog) confirm that she wasn't indicating to blood ?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Tony Bennett said:
inspectorfrost wrote on the Jill Havern forum ('Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann') tonight:

QUOTE

I read the [Australian] football forum Madeleine thread and wondered why so many McCann supporters appear so rabid and intransigent. There is something seriously wrong with some of them.
742129.gif


I also wondered why some keep bleating on and on that the cadaver dog reacts to blood, when the blood dog confirmed it was not blood on several occasions?
2699404744.gif

UNQUOTE

Not only do I agree with the Inspector, but his answer saves me some time in answering most of the questions on here about what each dog alerts to.

inspectorfrost has conveniently provided a concise answer

Simple: the human corpse dog alerts to human corpse scent; the blood dog alerts to blood. That is why both are used. I have said as much already on this thread.
Click to expand...

Do you read the PJ Files Tony....you know from Grimes when even he has said and put in a statement that both dogs alert to blood. Or do you know the dogs better than Grimes?
 
When both dogs alert, it is because blood may be present....when only one dog alerts then it could be body scents. Oh dear Bennett, you still not understanding it are you. BOTH DOGS ALERT TO BLOOD...UNDERSTAND THAT PLEASE.
 
debunker said:
Mr Bennett still frit it appears.

Any reasonable person might believe that his unwillingness to support his contentions about the dogs indicates his INABILITY to support them - that they might have a validity much lower than 100%.

It is now over a week since I asked him the simple questions, and still he evades, avoids and obfuscates.
Click to expand...
ANSWERS verbatim from the official translation of the Portuguese Attorney-General's final report on the Madeleine McCann investigation, Portuguese Police Process File pages 4628 to 4630:

"The results of the search with these dogs, filmed and on file, were as follows:

Tracker dog 'Eddie' (detects cadaver odours)* 'marked' [details follow, over 2 pages, of the 13 places where Eddie marked cadaver scent].

These dogs have been used successfully many times by Scotland Yard and the F.B.I. They are a means to finding evidence, but any traces detected by them have to be...examined at an accredited laboratory.

The dogs' trainer Martin Grime says in his report that whilst the evidence might not be sufficient in court, it can help in the gathering of intelligernce in investigating serious crimes. Scientist John Lowe [from the Forensic Science Service, Birmingham, UK] says that...normally they accept the word of the handler, who asserts that dogs are more sensirive than any other technique normally used by crime scene technicians".

* underlining in the original by the Attorney-General


I rest my case.
 
Wonder if Bennett is aware that Grimes made a statement saying there was only a possibility of scent on Cuddlecat...not for certain, and not proved.....it's in the files
 
Tony Bennett said:
ANSWERS verbatim from the official translation of the Portuguese Attorney-General's final report on the Madeleine McCann investigation, Portuguese Police Process File pages 4628 to 4630:

"The results of the search with these dogs, filmed and on file, were as follows:

Tracker dog 'Eddie' (detects cadaver odours)* 'marked' [details follow, over 2 pages, of the 13 places where Eddie marked cadaver scent].

These dogs have been used successfully many times by Scotland Yard and the F.B.I. They are a means to finding evidence, but any traces detected by them have to be...examined at an accredited laboratory.

The dogs' trainer Martin Grime says in his report that whilst the evidence might not be sufficient in court, it can help in the gathering of intelligernce in investigating serious crimes. Scientist John Lowe [from the Forensic Science Service, Birmingham, UK] says that...normally they accept the word of the handler, who asserts that dogs are more sensirive than any other technique normally used by crime scene technicians".

* underlining in the original by the Attorney-General


I rest my case.
Click to expand...


Oh dear verbatim not good enough

From Grime's statemement

The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver'
Click to expand...

They find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.
Click to expand...

'Can the dog mix up traces of human odours with others that are non-human''
I cannot comment on what the dogs think.
Click to expand...
 
Tony Bennett said:
Is he indeed? So has he explained yet why he claims to have been the first to find Stuart Lubbock, 'floating [sic] face up at the bottom of the pool', whilst another witness said that he was the first to find Stuart, 'floating face down on the top of the pool'?

And that's just one of dozens of contradictions which I documented in my book.

Also, has Barrymore explained exactly what his manager Mike Browne was doing at the scene before the police arrived? (apart from flushing quantities of Class A drugs down the toilet)?
Click to expand...

Go and ask them Tony...or you not brave enough
 
During the meeting were exhibited videos with the details of search activities including the sniffer dogs lead by Martin GRIME. GRIME commented on the actions of the dogs and added that no confirmed evidence or information could be taken from the alerts by the dogs but needed to be confirmed with physical evidence.



http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON-RIGATORY.htm



How long does a cadaver have to be in contact with a surface or an object for the odour to be detected''
Cross-contamination is immediate.



'Can the dog mix up traces of human odours with others that are non-human''
I cannot comment on what the dogs think.


'Based upon your experience with the dogs, can you specify whether the positive signals given by them have always matched the scientific results''
I cannot. In this case, for example, not all the alert signals have been investigated by the appropriate agencies in order to provide forensic comparations, in spite of indications to the contrary.

From Martin Grimes http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm


still want to debate Bennett

 
Tony Bennett said:
inspectorfrost wrote on the Jill Havern forum ('Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann') tonight:

QUOTE

I read the [Australian] football forum Madeleine thread and wondered why so many McCann supporters appear so rabid and intransigent. There is something seriously wrong with some of them.
742129.gif


I also wondered why some keep bleating on and on that the cadaver dog reacts to blood, when the blood dog confirmed it was not blood on several occasions?
2699404744.gif

UNQUOTE

Not only do I agree with the Inspector, but his answer saves me some time in answering most of the questions on here about what each dog alerts to.

inspectorfrost has conveniently provided a concise answer

Simple: the human corpse dog alerts to human corpse scent; the blood dog alerts to blood. That is why both are used. I have said as much already on this thread.
Click to expand...

I thought that you agreed that Eddie reacts to blood and cadaver odour and Keela to blood alone. That is what Mr Grime clearly says.

The quotes are above.

am still waiting for your defence of the accuracy of the dogs gven the academic research suggesting a 70-90% range.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top