A wish for April Jones by Spudgun

by Guest 07.10.12 20:47

Putting this in here and not on the thread for April, as it will lead the topic in a different direction. An excellent piece as always from Spudgun, honest and outspoken but not sure about what he says at the conclusions, I know what he means and there have been a lot of tweets to that affect but ............

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

We must be careful what we say, but what do you think?

by **tigger** 07.10.12 21:11

Totally agree. He is saving his own sorry skin - the longer he kept them looking in the wrong spot, the more likely the body will not be found or murder cannot be proved when it is. Just like Tia.

It's the reason I used to like NYPD blues.

by Guest 08.10.12 12:50

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

A big thank you to Spudgun for posting this photo of a cadaver dog who can sniff death scent in water.

Incredible.

by Guest 08.10.12 12:56

[youtube][/youtube]

by **PeterMac** 08.10.12 13:09

Obviously a fix. Notoriously unreliable. Trainer showed it where to mark. !

by Guest 08.10.12 14:04

PeterMac wrote:Obviously a fix. Notoriously unreliable. Trainer showed it where to mark. !

Seriously, my Dachshund could retrieve a stone with a marking on it from the water where I had thrown it.
How she did it, I've never understood. I threw the thing into a nearby river, 2-3 m from the shore and the dog managed to find it underwater and bring it back perfectly every time.

by aiyoyo 08.10.12 14:26

PeterMac wrote:Obviously a fix. Notoriously unreliable. Trainer showed it where to mark. !

Yeap, incredibly unreliable - could be dirty nappies or rotting meat discarded into the water by the Public.

Come to think of it, why didn't Police let the dog check out his belongings like clothing items for example.
Can't use the excuse of contacts with *6 cadavers* during work surely?

by statsman 08.10.12 14:49

Actually, it's crossed my mind that if there is cadaver scent evidence, Bridger's defence could use the fact that the Met Police has dismissed this type of evidence in their review when they said that Madeleine could be alive.

by aiyoyo 08.10.12 14:53

statsman wrote:Actually, it's crossed my mind that if there is cadaver scent evidence, Bridger's defence could use the fact that the Met Police has dismissed this type of evidence in their review when they said that Madeleine could be alive.

Hey, good one! Too good to resist - which lawyer would resist the use of it?

by **PeterMac** 08.10.12 15:11

statsman wrote:Actually, it's crossed my mind that if there is cadaver scent evidence, Bridger's defence could use the fact that the Met Police has dismissed this type of evidence in their review when they said that Madeleine could be alive.

The evidence of the cadaver dogs must lead to the recovery of the body. Otherwise there is nothing. As some people well know !

by statsman 08.10.12 15:32

The evidence of the cadaver dogs must lead to the recovery of the body. Otherwise there is nothing.

Well, thank goodness there is the evidence given in the recent trial of David Gilroy to contradict this!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by sami 08.10.12 15:44

statsman wrote: Well, thank goodness there is the evidence given in the recent trial of David Gilroy to contradict this!

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Take a look at Martin Grimes report on Eddie and Keelas findings in PDL and how one should interpret their alerts. A positive indication by the EVRD is not enough evidence on its own. It will depend on what other evidence the police have in relation to April's case, as I am sure it did in the Pilley trial.

by statsman 08.10.12 15:53

A positive indication by the EVRD is not enough evidence on its own.

Agreed, and in the Pilley trial there was further corroborating evidence which led to him being found guilty

However, the evidence of the cadaver dogs did not lead to the recovery of Suzanne Pilley's body, which is the point I was making.

by **PeterMac** 08.10.12 16:55

statsman wrote:
A positive indication by the EVRD is not enough evidence on its own.
Agreed, and in the Pilley trial there was further corroborating evidence which led to him being found guilty
However, the evidence of the cadaver dogs did not lead to the recovery of Suzanne Pilley's body, which is the point I was making.

Yes, quite so. Abandoned clothing, other forensic traces, AND an alert by a cadaver dog would begin to add up with each piece corroborating the others.