The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!


Forensics Revisited

Page 7 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 30.06.18 21:46

Re: Abduction of Madeleine McCann on 3rd May 2007

A DNA profile has been obtained from the reference samples of Amelie Eve McCANN (SBM/2) and Sean Michael McCANN (SBM/3).
..................

If the twins had been drugged, wouldn't it have come to light when their reference samples were being analyzed for a DNA profile?

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 10062
Reputation : 4056
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Hobs on 01.07.18 0:19

@Verdi wrote:Re: Abduction of Madeleine McCann on 3rd May 2007

A DNA profile has been obtained from the reference samples of Amelie Eve McCANN (SBM/2) and Sean Michael McCANN (SBM/3).
..................

If the twins had been drugged, wouldn't it have come to light when their reference samples were being analyzed for a DNA profile?  

No.
They would have been sequencing their DNA not looking for traces of drugs.
The tests would be different.

Testing the twins for sedation would require at least some idea of the types of drugs that could be used for sedation so they would know what to test for and with what chemical.
They would be looking at the commonly used and easily available as a start  such as childrens cough mixtures or phenergan, paracetemol or other OTC medications which would have a sedative affect, travel sickness pills etc.
Since they were almost all doctors , they would also be thinking about  what doctors would have access to both as OTC adult medications which could have a sedative affect, more so on a child and also that which would be prescription only.

The latter would probably require  access to prescriptions signed by the mccanns or the other doctors for patients, how much, what strength and when.
They would be looking at self medication which is frowned on by the GMC and also what if anything the mccanns and chums had been prescribed, dosage and the reason.

More so they would be looking at kate as she was a p/t locum gp.

They would also be looking at the medical histories of the children (or at least trying to) to see what illnesses if any they had had, their vaccination records, any health issues such as Maddie's coloboma and anything that was related to that, autism or other disability (Maddie being born almost perfect)
They would be looking at any and all GP visits which could perhaps provide a motive or lack of visits which could also provide a motive.
Hospital visits whether as an accident or in relation to medical history which, had Maddie been found  sooner rather than later, could provide evidence if she was found to have physical injuries such as fractures, cuts, scarring etc.
If, for example, Maddie had been found with  healed and/or healing fractures, scarring and/or healing cuts, bruises or other injuries that could not have happened between the time she was abducted and the time she was found, then they would be looking at medical records to see if Maddie had been treated at a hospital.
If, for example she had had an old healed fracture of the arm but had not gone to hospital for treatment, then questions would be asked as to why she had not been treated at a hospital, had she been treated by her parents and if so, why had she not been taken to hospital. This would lead to questions about abuse and neglect and lead to charges as well as losing custody of the twins and also their medical licenses.

The mccanns knew that the twins had been sedated and with what and how much.
The expected reaction would be to demand the children be taken to hospital, checked for signs of sedation and drugs and also for signs  of physical injury/sexual abuse.
The parents would not have known if the children had been sedated and with what, if they had be injured by the abductor before abducting Maddie.
This would have been the expected even though they were doctors, they would not have the equipment to test for whatever had been given.

Since the mccanns did not have the children taken to hospital for tests, it showed they knew the children had not been assaulted physically and also knew with what they had been sedated with, how much and what effects it would have.
They also refused to allow them to be examined since it would show sedation and also if they had been sedating them regularly, it would show up in their hair samples.
Long time sedation would result in prosecution, loss of custody of the twins and also loss of their license to practice and thus their jobs, also leading to losing their reputations, house, friends and possibly family and social status.

That they had their hair cut after a few months, both the twins and the parents and that the mccanns felt it important enough to include in their blog/statements makes it sensitive to them.
Also kate's description of having their hair tested, having chunks of it cut out it complete tosh.
They only need a few strands which would be taken from  underneath in all probability so as to not be obvious not the chunks as described by kate, even though these tests were at the behest of the mccanns.
I also wonder what remit the testers were given, what drugs they were to test for (not whatever the mccanns had used either on the twins or themselves)
The tests were done well after whatever the twins had been given would not show up and if long term sedation had been used at some point then stopped, after their haircuts so the drugs would no longer be present and show up.

I do wonder at the hairs found in the hire car, if there was corpse banding on them?
If so, how would they explain the presence of hairs from a corpse in the hire car and, even if there was only 15/19 markers relating to Maddie, with 4 markers too degraded to identify, why a dead body with links to the mccanns  was present in the hire car weeks after Maddie went missing?

Can't blame that on dealing with corpses in the days before going on vacation or it belonging to one of the family who came over from the UK to help.
A zombie would be rather noticeable.

Would they try and claim the evidence had been planted?
It would mean acknowledging Maddie was dead for a start thus the end of the fund.
It would also mean who planted the evidence since they would have to have found Maddie's remains or had access to them after she died (the killer)
Couldn't be the police since they would have announced it and Maddie would be given a dignified burial so it had to be the killer trying to implicate the mccanns.
Why though would they take the risk of planting evidence in the hire car when there were so many police/reporters/searchers around and why would the mccanns not  complain about the smell in the car, keep the trunk open each night and come up with excuses for what was found?

It leads then straight to the mccanns, they had the opportunity, the means and the motive and would also explain their language and behavior regarding the car, the smell and the evidence found.
Why come up for explanations and excuses for something you did not do?

____________________
The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.
avatar
Hobs
Researcher/Analyst

Posts : 915
Reputation : 595
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 54
Location : uk

View user profile http://tania-cadogan.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 01.07.18 1:35

My point is, if the twins were out for the count as claimed by the McCanns and sources close to the family and supposedly witnessed by GNR officers - why weren't they tested?

It's late so this is entirely off the top of my head - when were the twins DNA profiles established, by whom and by what method. I don't recall any mention of buccal samples being taken along with the rest of the group by the PJ forensics when conducting their initial investigation of the crime scene, yet the twins appear in the July 2007 FSS report..



I understand that the twins DNA profile was possibly required to determine Madeleine's DNA said to be from the Rothley pillowcase but again, why were they not tested for drug ingestion - it was still within the time frame for hair/fingernail testing.

If thoughts of sedation were considered, as mentioned by Gonçalo Amaral and the McCanns in connection with the phantom abductor - why weren't the twins tested?

I've yet to be convinced.

Excuse any errors, not only is it late but by connection is painfully slow and posting is difficult. I blame the world cup and the weather.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 10062
Reputation : 4056
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 01.07.18 13:34


____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 10062
Reputation : 4056
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Doug D on 01.07.18 16:29

Lesley Denton’s reports dated 18th July:


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/01_volume_I_o_apenso_I_Page_101_small1.jpg


 
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/01_volume_I_o_apenso_I_Page_102_small1.jpg
 
with her signed ‘destruction’ letter dated 19th July:
 


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/01_volume_I_o_apenso_I_Page_103_small1.jpg
 
‘Same’ unsigned destruction letter dated 21st August 2007, although the 'order reference', whatever that may be, has changed from Denton's letters and presumably this letter relates to the 'new' set of samples collected after Eddie & Keela went in to 5A on 3rd August and then the Renault on 6th and then in the early hours of 7th August
 


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P9/09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2282.jpg
 
Then Lowe’s report dated 6th September from examination dated 7th August:
 
This report summarises the results of DNA profiling tests conducted on a number of samples submitted to the Birmingham laboratory of the Forensic Science Service(R) from the Leicestershire Constabulary on behalf of the Pol - ia Judiciaria and Laboratorio De Policia Cientifica on 7th August 2007 ………………
 
JOHN ROBERT LOWE BSc CBiol NliBiol RFP 
Date:
6 September 2007 
Processos Vol X Pages 2659 - 2660
 
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm
 
…………………………….
 
The ‘destruction letters’ talk about destroying the perishable samples unless notification is received within 21 days, but reading the ‘Memorandum of Understanding for Retained Materials’:
 
[url=http://www.npcc.police.uk/documents/FoI publication/Disclosure Logs/Crime FOI/2012/199 12 Att 01 of 1 Forensic Exhibit Retention Guidance.pdf]http://www.npcc.police.uk/documents/FoI%20publication/Disclosure%20Logs/Crime%20%20FOI/2012/199%2012%20Att%2001%20of%201%20Forensic%20Exhibit%20Retention%20Guidance.pdf[/url]

it states that


‘any DNA extracts recovered from them will be retained frozen by the FSP in line with this guidance’


and


‘case material’ for serious crime should be retained for 30 years,
 
so whilst the perishable samples may have been destroyed, the extracts should still be knocking around. Without a good system for retaining these sorts of samples and materials, cold case reviews could not happen. 
 
The ‘non-perishable’ hair samples ‘are returned to you’ (is this D.S. Prior or the PJ?), other than the parts ‘which were removed for examination’ and again these ‘removed parts’ should be retained for 30 years.
 
This is all based on UK law, but as they were working at the request of the PJ, should they not have been acting on Portuguese instructions in any event?

eta:

According to the bewk, hair samples specifically for drug testing were taken on 24th September. One has to ask why, when samples had already been taken of the twins hair which should have still been available.

Doug D

Posts : 2639
Reputation : 927
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by FH on 05.07.18 15:06

I have 100% confidence in the dogs and I am 100% sure from the parents behaviour that  they know exactly what happened to their little girl. The fact they haven't been charged , despite all the evidence makes me think there could easily be a high level cover up.  

I do have a question about cadaverine, or whatever volatile compounds the dogs are trained to pick up.  Is cadaverine an indicator of a corpse, or of dead tissue? Does anyone know how much dead tissue is needed for cadaverine to develop?  If say,  I sliced the top off my thumb and that skin tissue was left to decay -  I am assuming that would produce cadaverine, but I am not dead, just missing the top of my thumb.   Would  only skin be enough, or does it need muscle tissue, organ tissue.... I guess what I am asking is  could the dog detect the scent of  death, without there being a whole dead body, just a bit of dead tissue?

FH

Posts : 120
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2012-04-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 05.07.18 15:30

@FH wrote:I have 100% confidence in the dogs and I am 100% sure from the parents behaviour that  they know exactly what happened to their little girl. The fact they haven't been charged , despite all the evidence makes me think there could easily be a high level cover up.  

I do have a question about cadaverine, or whatever volatile compounds the dogs are trained to pick up.  Is cadaverine an indicator of a corpse, or of dead tissue? Does anyone know how much dead tissue is needed for cadaverine to develop?  If say,  I sliced the top off my thumb and that skin tissue was left to decay -  I am assuming that would produce cadaverine, but I am not dead, just missing the top of my thumb.   Would  only skin be enough, or does it need muscle tissue, organ tissue.... I guess what I am asking is  could the dog detect the scent of  death, without there being a whole dead body, just a bit of dead tissue?

An excellent question if I might say!

I'm no expert but I think you'll find trained dogs react to the scent of the decaying process of a corpse, which produces many compounds apart from cadavarine/putrifaction.  An example might be to question whether or not if you chopped the end off your finger (don't try this at home folk) and left it around for a few hours or days, would you be able to detect the scent of death - the answer to that I believe would be no.  If I'm wrong, no doubt someone will spring forth to correct me.

Meanwhile, this article makes interesting reading on the subject and might explain (in lay terms) better than I ever can, also a nice little plug for our canine friends  I can't vouch for scientific authenticity but the author would appear to be professional..

Dogs Can Detect Dead Bodies Better than Any Machine

Kiona Smith-Strickland

If you’re a detective who needs to find a corpse, there are lots of ways to look: you can comb the woods in a line search or hunt for hidden graves with ground-penetrating radar. In most cases, though, the most versatile and reliable method has four legs and a wet nose.

No machine can reliably identify the odor of decomposition, but properly trained Human Remains Detection (HRD) dogs can.

However, scientists aren’t sure exactly which chemicals make up the scent that HRD dogs recognize. A decomposing human body releases 478 different chemical compounds, and researchers are still trying to figure out which ones really matter to HRD dogs. Learning the answer could help improve canine training, which could help find crime victims and missing persons.

Whatever the chemical signature is, it’s present through the whole process, from fresh corpses in the first few hours after death to skeletons several years old. It’s also present in several types of tissue, including blood, bone, and fat. Properly trained HRD dogs can identify the scent not just in whole bodies, but in blood spatter, bone, and even cremated remains. They can even pick up the scent left behind in the soil after a body has been removed from a grave.

The signature scent of human death is also unique to humans. Trained HRD dogs can tell the difference between human remains and animal remains.

Of course, in order to recognize and find the scent of human remains in so many contexts, HRD dogs need a lot of training, including practice finding human remains in as many forms as possible – from fresh blood to old, dry bone, and from ashes to whole bodies – so they can recognize remains on a real search, no matter what shape the body is in.

So, how do they do it?
What’s That Smell?

Two of the best known chemicals are cadaverine and putrescine, chemical compounds produced by the breakdown of amino acids during decomposition, but they tell only a fraction of the story.

A 2004 study by Arpad A. Vass at the University of Tennessee Anthropological Research Facility—better known as the Body Farm—sampled chemicals in grave soil and in the air just above graves. Vass and his colleagues found over 400 compounds, but no measurable amounts of cadaverine or putrescine. These two compounds don’t seem to be a key part of the scent of death, after all, at least not at every stage of the process.
Faking the Scent of Death

But for years, scientists thought these chemicals were the source of the distinctive scent of human remains. There are even synthetic versions on the market, which are still used in some HRD canine training, despite a lot of debate among canine handlers.

In order to learn to find something by scent, dogs need to practice with the real scent. That’s why, for example, handlers who train drug dogs are allowed to work with actual narcotics for training. So, to learn how to find dead people, HRD dogs need to practice on – you guessed it: actual dead people, or body parts. Getting access to real body parts is, predictably, not easy. That’s why “pseudo-scents” like synthetic cadaverine and putrescine are still so popular; they’re a lot easier to come by, but science seems to indicate that they’re not actually a good substitute for the real thing.
Is It In Our Bones?

Bone may hold at least part of the answer. A 2008 study at the Body Farm compared chemical vapors given off by bones from humans, dogs, deer, and pigs, and found that each type of bone produced noticeably different ratios of certain classes of chemicals. Researchers said that these scents probably contributed to the overall scent of decomposition, but it’s not yet clear whether these same compounds could are present in, for example, blood or ash. That research followed a 2006 study of soil from the campsite of the ill-fated Donner Party, which found that phosphates may be a measurable by-product of the breakdown of human bone.

Vass and his colleagues have done a series of studies on decomposing bodies, from 2004 to 2012, and the results make up the Decompositional Odor Analysis Database. It’s safe to say that science is still trying to sniff out the answer.

Meanwhile, although the exact mechanism isn’t yet understood by humans, it’s very clear that correctly trained HRD canines can reliably find human remains, from hidden graves to disaster zones.

https://gizmodo.com/the-science-behind-dogs-that-detect-dead-bodies-1702605569

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 10062
Reputation : 4056
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Doug D on 05.07.18 20:06

Just to correct my post at #155 above.
 
On 3rd August it was only Keela (the blood dog) that was taken back to 5A.
 
Eddie and Keela were both taken there originally on 31st July and following both dogs marking behind the sofa, the floor tiles and skirting were removed on the evening of 1st and early hours of 2nd August.
 
Keela was then taken back to 5a on the evening of 3rd, (so after the tiles had been lifted and skirting removed) and he alerted as follows:
 
19.19 The dog "marked" an area of tiles in the living room, next to the window and behind the sofa.

19.20 The dog "marked" the lower part of the left white coloured curtain of the window behind the sofa.

 
and the swabs were then taken overnight on 4th/5th, in accordance with the advice given by Jonathan Smith from the NCA &/or FSS.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BLOOD.htm

Doug D

Posts : 2639
Reputation : 927
Join date : 2013-12-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by NickE on 17.07.18 10:11

Re the dogs.
I've asked two different K9 dog handlers in the Swedish Police forces if a cadaver dog is able to alert to a site inside a building if only clothes that have been weared by an deceased person had been on that site.
-"Yes, it would be enough."

____________________
When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out".
avatar
NickE

Posts : 1228
Reputation : 412
Join date : 2013-10-27
Age : 43

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Jill Havern on 17.07.18 10:43

Kate's book 'madeleine', Page 219: "Did they really believe that a dog could smell the 'odour of death' three months later from a body that had been so swiftly removed?"
avatar
Jill Havern


Posts : 12748
Reputation : 5749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by NickE on 17.07.18 11:35

@Jill Havern wrote:Kate's book 'madeleine', Page 219: "Did they really believe that a dog could smell the 'odour of death' three months later from a body that had been so swiftly removed?"
Kate should have done some more research before she was writing things like that.
In 1989 a girl, Helen Nilsson 10yo dissapeared in the south of Sweden.
The case remained unsolved until 2004 when the Police sent in two cadaverdogs in a cabin that belonged to a suspect.
Both the dogs alerted to the same sites in the cabin, WITHOUT remains and now the suspicions were strenghtened against this man.
He was sentenced in 2005 and later committed suicied.
"Three months" Kate is nothing, these dogs alerted after 5 years WITHOUT remains and solved one of the coldest case in Sweden.
https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=83&artikel=438197

Edit:
Jill, I will ask the K9 dog handler about this with odours and time.
I coming back here with an answer.

____________________
When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out".
avatar
NickE

Posts : 1228
Reputation : 412
Join date : 2013-10-27
Age : 43

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 17.07.18 12:16

Martin Grime's report - Eddie and Keela

CADAVER SCENT

The odour target of cadaver is scientifically explained through 'volatile organic
compounds' that in a certain configuration are received by the dog as a
receptor. Recognition then gives a conditioned response 'ALERT'. Despite
considerable research and analytical investigation the compounds cannot as
yet be replicated in laboratory processes. Therefore the 'alert' by dogs without
a tangible source cannot be forensically proven at this time. Cadaver scent
cannot readily be removed by cleaning as the compounds adhere to surfaces.
The scent can be 'masked' by bleach and other strong smelling odours but
the dog's olfactory system is able to isolate the odours and identify specific
compounds' and mixes. Cadaver scent contamination may be transferred in
numerous scenarios. Any contact with a cadaver which is then passed to any
other material may be recognised by the dog causing a 'trigger' indication.
Vol. IX p. 2480

EVRD

'Eddie' The Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (E.V.R.D.) will search for and
locate human remains and body fluids including blood in any environment or
terrain. The initial training of the dog was conducted using human blood and
stil born decomposing piglets. The importance of this is that the dog is
introduced to the scent of a decomposing body NOT FOODSTUFF. This
ensures that the dog disregards the 'bacon sandwich' and 'kebab' etc that is
ever present in the background environment. Therefore the dog would
remain efficient searching for a cadaver in a café where the clientele were sat
eating bacon sandwiches. He has additionally trained exclusively using
human remains in the U.S.A. in association with the F.B.I. The enhanced
training of the dog has also involved the use of collection of 'cadaver scent'
odor from human corpses using remote technical equipment which does not
contact the subject. This method is comparable to the simulation of cross
contamination. It does however differ in that the remote scent samples
recovery does not involve subject matter and therefore is a 'pure' scent
sample. The dog has since initial training gained considerable experience in
successfully operationally locating human remains and evidential forensic
material.

The E.R.V.D. has successfully in training and in operational casework located
Human cadaders, whether in the whole or parts thereof, deposited surface or
sub-surface to a depth of approximately 1 metre shortly after death (though
precise times are not determinable) to the advanced stages of decomposition
and putrefaction through the skeletal. This includes incinerated remains even if
large quantities of accelerant have been involved. The dog has successfully in
training and in operational casework located a human cadavers in water either
from the bank siade or when deployed in a boat.

The dog has also been trained to identify cadaver scent contamination where
there is no physically retrievable evidence, due to scent adhering to pervious
material such as carpet or the upholstery in motor vehicles. This may be
achieved by the dog being deployed directly to the subject area or by scent
samples being taken by remote means on sterile gauze pads. The gauze
pads are then 'screened' in a line - up formation with the inclusion of a number
of control samples and blank sterile pads.

The dog will alert to the presence of cadaver scent whether it is at source or
some distance away from a deposition site. This enables the use of the dog to
identify the venting or exhaust channels of the scent through fissures in
bedrock or watercourses. A geophysical survey of the area will then reduce
the size of the search area.

The dog may be used to screen clothing, vehicles or property in a suitable
environment. This is completed in a scent discrimination exercise where
controls may be included to increase assurity.
....................

EVRD OPERATIONAL CASEWORK EXAMPLES

Northern Ireland, UK
A missing person, last seen returning from church, on foot, in N. Ireland. The
search of suspects 'burnt out vehicle' by forensic scientists did not reveal any
evidence. A search by the E.V.R.D. identified a position in the rear passenger
foot well where the dog alerted to the presence of human material. A sample
was taken and when analysed revealed the victims' DNA. The enquiry then
concentrated its efforts on the suspect and the E.V.R.D. located the body of
the woman in a river bank deposition site. Further searches identified a
Vol. IX p. 2482

location where the E.V.R.D. alerted in the front bedroom of the offenders
empty next door dwelling house. When interviewed the suspect admitted that
the body had lain in the room for 1 hour prior to disposal. Forensic teams
were unable to extract any forensic evidence despite being shown the exact
position.

Wiltshire, UK
A female was abducted by her ex-boyfriend. Intelligence suggested that her
ex-boy friend had taken her to his house. A search by the EVRD of the house
resulted in small blood stains being alert indicated and forensically confirmed
as her blood. The suspect, a builder, was in possession of a van. This was
searched and the EVRD dog alerted to a 'wacker plate', spirtit level, and
shovel. A site was identified where the suspect had been working. The EVRD
then located the body deposition site in an area of a garbage base that had
been prepared by the suspect. He had returned with the dead girl, dug a
grave in the centre, placed the body in the hole, replaced the spoil and then
used the shovel, wacker plate and spirit level to return the ground to its
original state.

Devon, UK
A female was abducted and her whereabouts were unknown. The suspect
was a bus driver. An initial search by the E.V.R.D. alerted at a location near
to a sighting of the suspect in suspicious circumstances. A forensic search at
the alert location revealed a small button off of the girls clothing in long grass.
The offender confessed to the murder and confirmed her body had been
initially temporarily placed at the dog's alert location.

Cornwall, UK
A woman was reported missing by her partner. A search of the suspects
house by the EVRD was conducted who indicated on the living room carpet.
No forensic evidence was recovered. Subsequently a diary written by the
suspect was alert indicated by the dog. The diary had written extracts that the
offender had laid the victim on the carpet whilst dead, the diary had in fact
been written by the suspect having handled the body. This was confirmed by
the offender in interview.

New Mexico, U.S.A.
A witness reported having seen two men walk off into brush land carrying a
spade and a corpse. The area was searched with the EVRD with no
indications being forthcoming. Other assets were utilised and the body was
found: buried at a depth of 8 feet, under the water table, 3 feet of cement and
5 feet of earth replaced on top the corpse that was wrapped in cling film.
There being no scent available to the dog to receive there was no forthcoming.

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

There is nothing fallacious about a trained specialist dogs olfactory senses.  As doctors, both Gerry and Kate McCann will know the process of body decomposition - they can dismiss the subject as often as they like but the dogs will always come back to bite them on the bum.  Or perhaps the ankle of a delicate flimsy specimen like Ms Hot Lips Healy.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 10062
Reputation : 4056
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Ruffian on 17.07.18 12:33

03h53 - the dog 'marked' an area of the lower right-hand side of the interior part of the baggage
compartment of the car;

03h53 - the dog 'marked' an area of the lower right-hand side of the interior part of the baggage
compartment of the car;
04h11 - the dog 'marked' the 'tidy' compartment [map/glove pocket] on the side of the driver's door,
which was found to contain the car key, the plastic electronic card type, with a key-ring of the
Budget rental company.

------

A low level incomplete DNA profile which matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Gerald McCann was obtained from cellular material on the key card (286C/2007-CRL(12)). This sample has not been sent for further testing using LCN DNA profiling tests.
--------
Eddie alerted to Gerry's DNA profile who is very much alive
avatar
Ruffian

Posts : 44
Reputation : 32
Join date : 2016-04-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 17.07.18 12:57

Eddie alerted to Gerry's DNA profile who is very much alive
CANINE VEHICLE SEARCHES.

Ten vehicles were screened in an underground multi storey car park at
Portimao. The vehicles, of which I did not know the owner details, were
parked on an empty floor with 20-30 feet between each. The vehicle
placement video recording and management of the process was conducted
by the PJ. The EVRD was then tasked to search the area. When passing a
vehicle I now know to be hired and in the possession of the McCann family,
the dog's behaviour changed substantially. This then produced an alert
indication at the lower part of the drivers door where the dog was biting and
barking. I recognise this behaviour as the dog indicating scent emitting from
the inside of the vehicle through the seal around the door.

This vehicle was then subjected to a full physical examination by the PJ and
no human remains were found. The CSI dog was then tasked to screen the
vehicle. An alert indication was forthcoming from the rear driver's side of the
boot area. Forensic samples were taken by the PJ and forwarded to a
forensic laboratory in the U.K.

It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to 'cadaver scent'
contaminant or human blood scent.
No evidential or intelligence reliability can
be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence. The remainder of the vehicles were screened by the EVRD without any interest being shown. Therefore the CSI dog was not further deployed.


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

A frequently forgotten fact - Eddie the E.V.R.D. also alerts to the scent of human blood, in addition to cadavar.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 10062
Reputation : 4056
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 7 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum