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, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!

Forensics Revisited

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

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by nglfi on 29.10.17 19:11

Surely as well, if it was acceptable for the pillowcase to come from Rothley then why not something that definitely belonged to her? I seem to recall Kate said Madeleine didn't have a toothbrush of her own on holiday?? (which should have raised a massive red flag in itself). However surely there was something which definitively belonged to Madeleine in the Rothley home? What about her shoes with the lights on? Surely there's no way the twins wore those. Either way ample opportunities to secure her DNA I would have thought.

nglfi

Posts : 477
Reputation : 215
Join date : 2014-01-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 29.10.17 21:00

@Casey5 wrote:Madeleine's underwear, socks etc was available but wasn't it the British Ambassador who said the PJ weren't to remove the McCanns' laundry in case the press thought the McCanns were under suspicion?

QUALMS ABOUT INVESTIGATING THE McCANNS; THE THEORY OF ABDUCTION GAINS GROUND.

Someone puts forward the hypothesis according to which Madeleine would have died in her apartment, and that a member of the group would have removed her. It’s a possibility, but nothing so far, no evidence, happens to support that theory.

The McCanns are put up with David Payne. We want to search the accommodation of the family friends to try to pick up Madeleine’s clothes, especially those she was wearing on May 3rd at 5.35pm when she returned from the day centre with her mother and the twins. Evidently, this initiative is not widely supported. The British ambassador meets with the team directing the investigation.

The political and the diplomatic seem to want to prevent us from freely doing our work.

– I’m sure this check is necessary.

– The clothes? Are you mad? if I understand you properly, you want to go into the apartment to take clothes to have them analysed?

– Yes. What’s the problem? It’s a perfectly normal procedure in cases like this.

– Of course, but with this media hype…I don’t think I have ever in my life seen so many journalists….And I didn’t come down in the last shower.

The Truth of the Lie by Dr Goncalo Amaral - Chapter 3

____________________
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 : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 09.11.17 12:07

Snipped and bumped from previous post as leader to a Telegraph report back in September 2007 (that date again!), which could be the vital clue..

"One thing relative to the subject however is open to discussion .... why was Leicestershire Constabulary, John Lowe and the UK's prestigious Forensic Science Service involved with a Portuguese investigation?  Why did every sample submitted to the FSS for analysis produce a negative result?"


Madeleine McCann parents' new DNA hope

Madeleine McCann 

By Caroline Gammell
7:19AM BST 13 Sep 2007

The world's leading expert in DNA cast doubt on a key facet of the alleged forensic evidence against Kate and Gerry McCann last night as he offered to act as an expert witness for the couple.

Sir Alec Jeffreys, who invented DNA fingerprinting, said a match did not necessarily demonstrate a person's guilt or innocence.

It follows claims that DNA samples matched to Madeleine had been found in her parents' hire car and holiday apartment. Sources said the traces were being treated by Portuguese detectives as strong evidence that Madeleine's body was placed in the car.

However, Sir Alec told BBC's Newsnight programme: "There are no genetic characters in Madeleine that are not found in at least one other member of the family.

"So then you have an incomplete DNA profile that could raise a potential problem in assigning a profile to Madeleine given that all other members of that family would have been in that car."

Sir Alec, 57, added: "DNA testing seeks to establish whether DNA sample A from a crime scene came or did not come from individual B.

"So if you get a match there's very strong evidence that it did come from B. It is then up to investigators, the courts and all the rest of it to work out whether that connection is relevant or not.

"So DNA doesn't have the words innocence or guilt in it - that is a legal concept. What it seeks to establish is connections and identifications."

Off-camera, Sir Alec said he was prepared to act as a witness for the McCanns.


His caution came as a leading genetics expert also called into question the value of DNA evidence in its own right. Dr Paul Debenham, a member of the advisory body the Human Genetics Commission, said there could be legitimate reasons as to how DNA from Madeleine found its way into the hire car.

Prosecutors would need to establish that it got there as part of a criminal process and not through chance contact, he said.
Dr Debenham said: "With the current highly sensitive DNA methodologies we can deposit DNA as a trace amount just from contact with a fabric. And that fabric can touch another surface where the DNA is passed on.

"So there is a situation where there is a legitimate or a possible explanation as to how the DNA got on the back seat despite the individual not being there, but through some legitimate transfer of garments, clothes or soft toy.
"It questions the value of that particular evidence in interpreting what happened."

The development came as it emerged that Portuguese prosecutors have applied for Gerry McCann’s laptop and his wife’s personal diary to be handed over to the authorities investigating their daughter’s disappearance.

Detectives in the Algarve are particularly keen to track emails sent by Mr McCann, a cardiologist, from the computer he used while in Portugal to keep an almost daily blog on the campaign to find Madeleine.

An urgent application for access to the personal artefacts was made by public prosecutor Jose Cunha de Magalhaes e Meneses to a judge in Portimao yesterday.

Philomena McCann, Mr McCann's sister, said she advised her sister-in-law to keep the diary to show Madeleine how much they loved her.

She told The Sun: " I said to Kate that it would be a good idea if someone wrote down, for Madeleine, notes on everything that was happening, because we have to prove to Madeleine how much we looked for her and how much we love her.

"That wee girl will be thinking, 'They're not looking for me. My mummy, daddy and my aunties - they don't love me because they can't find me'.

"I was just thinking about how insecure Madeleine would be, so Kate has been keeping that journal faithfully every day.

"She's been writing down everything that we've been doing so we can prove to Madeleine that we have worked so hard to try and find her, that we've put our lives on hold to search for her and show our love for her is unending."

Gerry's brother John McCann said last night that his brother believed the Portuguese police had "gone up a cul-de-sac".

He told BBC's The One Show: "Gerry keeps telling me that they have gone up a cul-de-sac and have lost track of what they should really be doing."

Asked whether the fact the case was being dealt with at such a high level in Portugal gave him confidence, he said: "It does and it doesn't. There is data out there, there's all these leaks.

"There is so much speculation going on as to what the actual information the Portuguese police have.

"If they have got something that suggests Madeleine really is dead then for goodness sake tell the family who have the strongest feeling for this."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1562992/Madeleine-McCann-parents-new-DNA-hope.html


Just another uncanny coincidence in this prolonged saga, Sir Alec Jeffreys is a professor of genetics at Leicester University, the same place that houses Professor Gerald McCann.  Bet they've shared a pint or two at the bar!



 
 

____________________
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 : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Hobs on 09.11.17 16:39

Prosecutors would need to establish that it got there as part of a criminal process and not through chance contact, he said.
Dr Debenham said: "With the current highly sensitive DNA methodologies we can deposit DNA as a trace amount just from contact with a fabric. And that fabric can touch another surface where the DNA is passed on.

It was a bit more than a trace amount and a bit more than   touch transfer from one piece of fabric to another.
it also doesn't explain the blood and body fluids found in the apartment, which using his logic would have meant that either they came into contact with a stranger's dead body  fluids and then somehow obtained enough to leave a nice deposit both in the apartment and 25 odd days later in the hire car (why would they feel the need to collect body fluids, maybe fluids from a dead relative to be kept for use in a future emergency)
Or kate coming into contact with one of the corpses she allgedly had to certify as dead and then not washed either herself or her clothes for the whatever length of time before gently dabbing herself or her clothing into the back of the hire car.
Perhaps that was a photoshoot for GP monthly, centre page spread of doctors who could certify your loved one as dead.

Here we have Dr.kate healey/mccann who before coming on vacation came into contact with 6 corpses in her role as a part time locum GP.
Maybe she certified one of your loved ones.
Here she is modelling the outfit she was wearing at each of the visits.
Note the tasteful black and white checked pants, note also the delightful pink cuddlecat she carries with her to comfort the dead and the little red child's t shirt she touches them with to make them think of their lovely childhoods.
Nothing is too much for this caring doctor with a sense of fun.
She can take my pulse any day.
 If you wish to contact her for personal bookings/interviews or photos  you can contact her via clarence mitchell where for a large 'donation' she will be happy to oblige.

Next month we will be showcasing dr. gerry mccann in his snazzy speedos.
we expect this issue to be very popular so get your subscription in now so you don't miss out.

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

Posts : 854
Reputation : 517
Join date : 2012-10-20
Age : 53
Location : uk

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

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by JRP on 09.11.17 16:41

"Sir Alec Jeffreys, who invented DNA fingerprinting" sounds an impressive man to have on board, but when he says the DNA found on the back seat of a hire car, doesn't he mean DNA found in the boot of the car?
When he explains transfer could have happened from one item of clothing touching another before transferring to the vehicle, I thought the samples were taken from body fluids.


Wasn't there 15 markers out of 19?


I understand people share DNA with parents and siblings etc, but 15 out of 19 is considered a match isn't it?.

So who was leaking body fluids in the boot of a hire car, if not Madeleine, who was it?


Surely not sea bass and nappies  eek

JRP

Posts : 552
Reputation : 498
Join date : 2016-03-07
Age : 60
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 13.11.17 15:40

Martin Grimes Report Eddie and Keela - August 2007


Quote Martin Grimes: [i] "I have trained and handle two operational specialist search dogs:[/i]


[i]'Eddie' is a 7-year-old English Springer spaniel dog who is trained as an
Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (EVRD).

'Keela' is a three-year old English Springer spaniel bitch who is trained as an
Human blood search dog (C.S.I. dog)."


OPERATION TASK CANINE DEPLOYMENTS 1-8 AUGUST 2007

All five apartments were searched using the EVRD. The only alert indications
were at apartment 5a, the reported scene.

The EVRD alerted in the:
Rear bedroom of the apartment in the immediate right hand corner by
the door.
Living room, behind sofa.
Veranda outside parent's bedroom.
Garden area directly under veranda.

My observation of the dog's behaviour in this instance was that the dog's
behaviour changed immediately upon opening the front door to the apartment.
He will normally remain in the sit position until released and tasked to search.
On this occasion he broke the stay and entered the apartment with an above
average interest. His behaviour was such that I believed him to be 'in scent'
and I therefore allowed him to free search without direction to allow him to
identify the source of his interest. He did so alerting in the rear bedroom.

I released him from this and tasked him to continue to search. He did so
alerting in an area to the rear of the sofa in the lounge.


The dog's behaviour for these alerts led me to the following opinions:

MINISTERIO PUBLICO DE PORTIMAO

The first alert was given with the dogs head in the air without a positive area
being identified. This is the alert given by him when there is no tangible
evidence to be located only the remaining scent.

The second alert was one where a definitive area was evident. The CSI dog
was therefore deployed who gave specific alert indications to specific areas
on the tiled floor area behind the sofa and on the curtain in the area that was
in contact with the floor behind the sofa. This would indicate to the likely
presence of human blood.


The forensic science support officers were then deployed to recover items for
laboratory analysis.

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.

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.


BOXES OF CLOTHING 1 PROPERTY FORM MR McCANN'S RESIDENCE.

At a suitable venue numerous boxes of clothing 1 property taken from the
McCann present residence were screened using both the EVRD and the CSI
dog. The venue was screened by both dogs prior to introducing clothing /
property. Neither gave an alert indication. The screening then took place with
the contents of each box being placed around the room in turn. The process
was recorded by video and written records were taken by PJ officers.

The only alert indication was by the EVRD on clothing from one of the boxes. I
am not in possession of the details as these were recorded by the PJ
officers present.

MINISTERIO PUBLICO DE PORTIMAO

It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to 'a cadaver scent'
contaminant. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this
alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.

MINISTERIO PUBLICO DE PORTIMAO

SUMMARY

The tasking for this operation was as per my normal Standard Operating
Procedures. The dogs are deployed as search assets to secure evidence and
locate human remains or Human blood.

The dogs only alerted to property associated with the McCann family. The dog
alert indications MUST be corroborated if to establish their findings as
evidence.

Therefore in this particular case, as no human remains were located, the only
alert indications that may become corroborated are those that the CSI dog
indicated
by forensic laboratory analysis.


My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is
suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however
suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a
number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence
reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with
corroborating evidence.


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


[/i]

____________________
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 : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 13.11.17 16:10

All is not as it seems with cuddlecat - I fear he played a duplicious part in the summer of 2007.

In the words of Martin Grimes..

"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."

If y ou watch the video recording of the dogs search, this interest in cuddlecat is not apparent.

At 01:38 it looks to me as though Eddie stuck his snout in a bag on the floor, which fell over and cuddlecat rolled out - Eddie didn;t take any more notice.

At 04:10 Eddie barks after sniffing the top of cupboards with closed doors.

At 05:45 minutes Grimes takes cuddlecat from one of said cupboards but Eddie shows no interest.

dontgetit


____________________
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 : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by skyrocket on 13.11.17 20:31


 
@Verdi - I have to strongly disagree with you re: this clip and Eddie's reaction to cuddlecat.

Eddie moves around the sitting room and seems to be sensing something. He ignores the flower toy on the table and everything else in the room and homes in on the basket/bag next to the chair. He returns to the bag area 3 times and on the third time he picks cuddlecat out of the bag with his mouth before dropping it almost straight away when the bag is pulled over, seemingly startling him momentarily. Eddie then picks cuddlecat up again before dropping it in the centre of the room.
Martin Grime then appears to have moved cuddlecat to the closed cupboard (one assumes to concentrate any odour coming from it). Eddie shows a lot of interest around the cupboard and then indicates strongly by barking. He returns to the cupboard and barks for a second time. Martin gives Eddie the lie down command and then he opens the cupboard door and takes out cuddlecat to show the camera. Eddie remains under command and Martin walks past with cuddlecat.
 
Nothing I have seen during any of Martin Grime's video indicates that Eddie ever continues to show interest in an object or an area once he has positively marked and Martin has acknowledged - Eddie always immediately moves on to wherever Martin guides him. He is a well-trained working dog.
 
Hope that helps.
avatar
skyrocket

Posts : 609
Reputation : 598
Join date : 2015-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 14.11.17 1:53

According to Martin Grimes, an EVRD dog will raise it's head when only residue cadavar scent is present and will bark only when the source of cadavar scent is located.  The tour with Eddie the EVRD of the villa occupied the McCanns, captured on video, show neither.

Eddie the EVRD was not moving around the sitting room seeming to be sensing something.  He was doing what he was trained to do, investigating any given area for the scent of cadavar or body fluids.  Carefully guided by his trainer/handler, he enters the living room, sniffs around every nook and crannie, hoovers around the lower curtain area, moves to the side where he sticks his snout in what looks like a bag of some sort on the floor, bag topples and out falls cuddlecat.  Eddie briefly picks up cuddlecat and immediately drops it in the middle of the floor - end of that episode.

Moving to another room, Eddie again hoovers around guided by Grimes and encouraged to linger around some floor standing cupboards.  He jumps up to the cupboard surface, drops back down and continues sniffing around - again without raising his head to indicate scent or barking to indicate the source of cadavar, at least not immediately.  When he does bark he's in the corner of the room, this is when a yard or so away Grimes bends down and takes a cuddlecat from the cupboard - no further reaction from Eddie.  Eddie can't talk humanoid, he can only do what he's trained to do. Grimes then stands before the camera proudly displaying his prize cuddlecat, like something from a cheesy shopping channel.

Question  ... what was cuddlecat doing on the top of a bag on the floor of the villa living room and secondly, what was cuddlecat doing cowering in a floor standing cupboard?

Whatever, if cuddlecat did whiff of cadavar it could only have been by contamination - if you follow the paw prints you will know cuddlecat was most assuredly not with Madeleine when she was 'abducted'. 

Cuddlecat has a tale to tell all of it's own - what a pity, like Eddie and Keela, he couldn't talk.

Think from another angle.  The UK establishment intervention was apparent from the night of 3rd/4th May 2007 and continues to this very day.  Logically thinking - is it really likely that the UK authorities would agree to sending over two highly respected trained specialist dogs, three months later,  to uncover something that might implicate the prime suspects without a contingency plan to cover all eventualities?

Whatever, despite doing what they do best, Eddie and Keela's visit to Praia Da Luz in August 2007 was a total waste of time, effort and money - it would appear.

Makes you think don't it?

____________________
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 : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Basil with a brush on 14.11.17 4:06

Probably best the pink cat can't talk Verdi, as I feel it very possibly witnessed more than one horror.

____________________
The lying didn't end it, the insult to my intelligence did.
avatar
Basil with a brush

Posts : 60
Reputation : 72
Join date : 2017-01-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.17 7:30

@skyrocket wrote:  
 
@Verdi - I have to strongly disagree with you re: this clip and Eddie's reaction to cuddlecat.

Eddie moves around the sitting room and seems to be sensing something. He ignores the flower toy on the table and everything else in the room and homes in on the basket/bag next to the chair. He returns to the bag area 3 times and on the third time he picks cuddlecat out of the bag with his mouth before dropping it almost straight away when the bag is pulled over, seemingly startling him momentarily. Eddie then picks cuddlecat up again before dropping it in the centre of the room.
Martin Grime then appears to have moved cuddlecat to the closed cupboard (one assumes to concentrate any odour coming from it). Eddie shows a lot of interest around the cupboard and then indicates strongly by barking. He returns to the cupboard and barks for a second time. Martin gives Eddie the lie down command and then he opens the cupboard door and takes out cuddlecat to show the camera. Eddie remains under command and Martin walks past with cuddlecat.
 
Nothing I have seen during any of Martin Grime's video indicates that Eddie ever continues to show interest in an object or an area once he has positively marked and Martin has acknowledged - Eddie always immediately moves on to wherever Martin guides him. He is a well-trained working dog.
 
Hope that helps.
I have to agree.

Martin Grimes was verifying the toy by hiding it somewhere else. I think the bag falling over confused the issue although it seemed Eddie showed some interest.

Does Martin Grimes make a throat chopping motion to the cameraman after finding it in the cupboard?

"Cut", he probably wants to say something.

Anyway, it seems Eddie thinks cuddlecat smells of cadaverine.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4402
Reputation : 2219
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by kinell on 14.11.17 8:00

Isn't Eddie trained to bark if he smells cadaverine?

____________________

avatar
kinell

Posts : 95
Reputation : 30
Join date : 2012-03-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by skyrocket on 14.11.17 8:38

@Verdi - I'm sorry, but no again. Eddie picks cuddlecat out of the bag. Might seem pedantic but cuddlecat did not fall out. Secondly, Eddie does indicate next to the cupboard. I suggest that Martin is experienced enough and knows Eddie well enough to know that picking up cuddlecat was a very weak indication. Eddie would not have then barked if he had not 'found what he was looking for' somewhere in the vicinity of the cupboard. Let's not forget, neither dog indicated anywhere else or with anyone elses possessions.

Now, in relation to the UK establishment, I have no doubt that 'they' had all the bases covered before the dogs were brought in. They couldn't refuse the Portuguese - how would that look and the PJ may then have asked an 'unco-operative' source for dog assistance (and I absolutely don't implicate Martin Grime but higher). I have no idea how these people operate but they don't appear to remotely worry about any sort of evidence passing into the public domain - look at the London bombings (7/7) with the sloppy photo-shopping and the continued insistence that the 'bombers' used a non-existent (cancelled) train. That sort of confidence suggests that they have the highest level of government support; and/or that there is a higher black governance structure; and that 'they' are well above the law.

Waste of time/money - absolutely not IMO. The results of the dogs give a whole lot of ordinary people who suspect something other than stranger abduction the confidence to dig and research the case. There is no escaping the fact that Eddie indicated the previous presence of a cadaver in 5A, the hire car, and on clothing/items belonging to the McCanns and no one else; and, that Keela indicated body fluids in 5A and the hire car which were shown to quite possibly have originated from Madeleine, although this was subsequently put into question by the British Government agency used to perform the tests. Eddie and Keela were stars (RIP).
avatar
skyrocket

Posts : 609
Reputation : 598
Join date : 2015-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 14.11.17 11:47

Seems I'm not the only one who thinks this way  [I've lifted the entire text to keep in context]..

ANALYSIS REPORT OF THE FIRST 11 VOLUMES OF THE INQUIRY (pages 1-3004) Central Department of Criminal Investigation, February, 8th, 2007

INTRODUCTION

2.1. The hypothesis of death is based on the following:

a) The witness Silvia Batista, page 1977, refers that at 3:00 h, May 4th, the couple asked for a priest, which she found strange since there was at that time any indication that the child was dead, and it is 'under those circumstances that usually the presence of a priest is demanded' (sic).

b) The search dog 'Eddie' (dog that signals the presence of cadaver odour) 'marked' (gave a signal) in the couples bedroom, at the apartment 5A, on an area close to the wardrobe (page 2054, and/or annex 88)

c) That same dog 'marked', in the same apartment, an area close to the window of the living room, which has a direct access to the street, behind the sofa (page. 2054 and/or annex 88)

d) Still in the apartment, the dog 'marked' an area in the garden, at the corner, down the vertical from the veranda (page 2054 and/or annex 88).

e) At the villa 'Vista do Mar', the house rented by the McCann after leaving the Ocean Club, the dog 'marked' the area of the closet that contained in its interior the soft toy belonging to Madeleine (cf. page. 2099 and/or annex 88)

f) From the exam to the clothing performed in a pavilion in Lagos, this same dog 'marked' some pieces of clothes that belonged to Kate Healy (pag 2101 and /or annex 88)

g) This dog signalled the exterior and interior parts, of the driver's door, of the Renault 59-DA-27 ' rented by the McCann (page. 2187 and /or annex 88)

h) Finally he 'marked' the key/card of this vehicle when hidden in a sand box (pag 2187 and/or annex 88)

i) The search dog, named 'Keela' (a she dog that detects the presence of human blood) 'marked' an area in the living room, in the apartment 5A, that had been 'marked' by the dog 'Eddy' (pag. 2054 and/or annex 88)

j) After the mosaics that this dog signalled had been retired, on a first inspection, and mentioned previously, she marked that same area once more (pag 2190 and/or annex 88)

k) She 'marked' also the inferior side of the left side curtains, of the window referred above (page 2190 and/or annex 88)

l) She 'marked' the inferior lateral right side, in the inside of the booth of the car 59-DA-27 (page 2187 and/or anex 88)

m) In what concerns the vehicle, 'Keela' 'marked' the little compartment of the driver's door, that contained the key/card of the vehicle (pag 2187 and/or annex 88)

n) This dog also 'marked' the key/card when the same was hidden into a sand box.

It should be noted the report made by the trainer /owner of these dogs. On this report it's mentioned the methodology of training:

'Eddie, the dog with an advanced training to detect mortal victims (E.V.R.D.), searches and locates human remains and body fluids, including blood, in any environment or terrain. The initial training of the dog was done with human blood and decaying piglets that were born dead. The importance of this training is that the dog learnt to identify the odour of a decaying body that is not food. This guaranties that the dog ignores the 'bacon sandwich' and the 'kebab', etc. that are always present in the environment. Besides that the dog will not alert to a meal prepared at home or on any other place. For instance, the dog will be efficient on searching a cadaver in café️ where the clients can be sitted eating a bacon sandwich. As a complement of this training, the dog receives an additional training in the USA, in association with the FBI, in which will be used exclusively human remains' (sic) (page 2493 and 2494).

This summarized description raises a question that we would like to see answered: could the dog be 'marking' not the odours emanated from a cadaver, directly or indirectly (by contagious), but from blood in putrefaction'

These dogs are means for obtaining proof but they cannot be used as proof. They must be taken as instruments. Any vestige, even invisible to the eye, recovered with the use of these dogs, has to be subjected to forensic exam on a credited laboratory.

It is the same Martin Grime that, at pages 2271, refers on his report: 'Although it cannot constitute proof admissible to court, it can help on the recovery of intelligence for the investigation of serious crimes'.

In this case the dogs signalled several places. The technicians of the Scientific Police Laboratory recovered those vestiges ' vestiges that that on it's majority were not visible to the eye ' and sent them to the laboratories for the necessary forensic exams, in order to recover and identify the DNA profiles, that might be extracted from them.

From the screening of the videos, referred previously, done when the dogs were working, some doubts arise. We don't want and we can't take the place of the trainer, we only wish to alert, with this paragraph, to some facts, that according to us, need further clarification.

If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times'

On one of the films, it's possible to see that 'Eddie' sniffs Madeleine's cuddle cat, more than once, bites it, throws it into the air and only after the toy is hidden does he 'mark' it (page 2099). Whys didn't he signal it when he sniffs it on the first time'

Apart from all that was said about the dogs, we must also take into attention the results of the forensic analysis that was performed by the experts on the Scientific Police Laboratory on the day immediately after the facts, and already mentioned where no vestige of blood was found.


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/OUSTROS_APENSOS_11_VOLUMES.htm

____________________
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 : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 14.11.17 12:18

@skyrocket wrote:@Verdi - I'm sorry, but no again.
@skyrocket - no need to apologize!

1.  I don't understand your point.  Picking up cuddlecat was a weak indication - of what?  Eddie didn't bark when he came across cuddlecat in the container on the floor, or show any other signs of reconnaisance, yet when cuddlecat is moved to another location during the same period of time - Eddie then later changes his mind and decides cuddlecat is a bit whiffy after all?

Be realistic, Eddie either detected a scent of cadavarine/body fluids or he didn't - it's what he was trained to do.  No time to sit and think over a bowl of water and dunking a boneo!

2.  The specialist EVRD (Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog) and CSI dog (human blood detecting dog) were deployed on the recommendation of Mark Harrison.

3.  The dogs were not deployed to satiate the lust for public knowledge, they were deployed (ostensibly) to assist the police with solving a serious crime so, as regards the investigation, a total waste of time, effort and money !!! 

The PJ were not able to move forward with the investigation following the dogs visit and the Metropolitan police, under the guise of Operation Grange, have seemingly refused to acknowledge even the dogs existence, let alone the alerts.  Go figure!

____________________
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 : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 14.11.17 12:22

@kinell wrote:Isn't Eddie trained to bark if he smells cadaverine?
YES - and that's an emphatic yes !!!  yes

____________________
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 : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by polyenne on 14.11.17 13:42

If the dog is trained to react when he detects what he is looking for, why, in most of the cases, we see the dog passing more than once by that place in an uninterested way, until he finally signals the place where he had already passed several times'

A dogs nose is a very sensitive organ. I suspect that, to a dog, in any given area there are a multitude of aromas and it has to pick out and determine the exact position of the one that it has been trained to identify. That may mean a number of "passes" to properly locate the odour.
avatar
polyenne

Posts : 383
Reputation : 274
Join date : 2017-03-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.17 14:12

@Verdi wrote:

Be realistic, Eddie either detected a scent of cadavarine/body fluids or he didn't - it's what he was trained to do.  No time to sit and think over a bowl of water and dunking a boneo!
I think Martin Grimes - who knows his dogs well - thought there may be been something about the way Eddie picked up Cuddlecat, may have thought it meant something, then checked it out by hiding it in a cupboard.

Martin knows what his dogs do and what it means.

Anyway... Eddie later barked at the cupboard it was in.

Here is the straw clutching blog where the straw clutching is going on:

https://madeleinemccannthetruth.wordpress.com/2012/02/25/cuddle-cat/

Here is a lie from the blog:  "What was their reasons for hiding cuddle-cat when the dog paid no interest whatsoever in the toy, during the searches?"


"The dog paid no interest whatsoever in the toy" .


Yet earlier in the blog:


"At 1 min 54 seconds you can see the same toy has been moved by Eddie"


Yes... Eddie showed no interest by picking it up and moving the toy (actually "bites it, throws it into the air "  according the PJ files).


That's "no interest" apparently.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4402
Reputation : 2219
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by skyrocket on 14.11.17 14:22

@Verdi

I appreciate that the PJ asked for clarification on the cuddlecat alert made by Eddie - I suspect that Martin Grime knew Eddie's MO so well (after 200 previous searches) that his reaction to cuddlecat was recognised as a possible precursor to a positive bark indication. As I understand it Martin then moved cuddlecat to a confined space to concentrate any cadaverine molecules. Once he had done this, Eddie indicates by barking. I don't believe that it is a case of maybe I will/maybe I wont - there was method to the process and the result was a positive alert (IMO).

The issue about the money spent on the dogs is not so clear cut as you suggest. All money spent during an investigation which doesn't result in any noticeable advancement could be described as a complete waste of time and money, but it's not really is it? Negative results still help clarify - they can prove what didn't happen and narrow the options of what did or could have happened.

However, the use of the EVRD and blood dogs in this case weren't only negative. Without the positive indications of both dogs the PJ would have had a hard time justifying the conclusion they made in their final report. The dogs backed up what Snr Amaral and the PJ had believed all along - they may not have been solid proof but they pointed in a very definite direction. The fact that the resulting forensic samples sent to the UK-Government owned FFS seem to have been down-graded in significance, for what-ever reason (correction of initial mistake or maliciously), which directly influenced the ability of the PJ to move forward with the investigation, doesn't detract from the fact that the dogs/Martin Grime had done their jobs effectively. And, as you quite rightly pointed out, the likes of us on here were/are an irrelevance in terms of decisions made and monies spent, but the fact remains that the dog indications have spurred many on to examine the case closely - which can't be a bad thing.

I understand the point you are making but, sadly, I think you could probably state that every single line of inquiry in this case can be described as a waste of time/money until Op Grange becomes a genuine investigation. The question is - what, if anything, will force that to happen?
avatar
skyrocket

Posts : 609
Reputation : 598
Join date : 2015-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by April28th on 14.11.17 14:41

The only caution I would add is the following quote:

'Apartment H5

We searched this apartment and the dog hasn't shown any interest in this particular apartment, apart from around the table, where there was a tennis ball which is how we reward the dog for finding things, as soon as we removed the tennis ball the interest was gone. And so it was a negative search.'

I suspect it is this reason that CC was put in the cupboard, because the first interaction was a 'playful' one, and following up with CC in the cupboard was in a sense a control experiment, where Eddie reacted despite not having sight of CC. The first 'go around' of the cupboards was also control, so that they wouldnt give a false positive.

Hope this makes sense!
avatar
April28th

Posts : 335
Reputation : 248
Join date : 2015-07-22

View user profile https://h42a.wordpress.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by Verdi on 14.11.17 15:35

@bluebag wrote:Here is the straw clutching blog where the straw clutching is going on:

https://madeleinemccannthetruth.wordpress.com/2012/02/25/cuddle-cat/

I'm not particularly interested in what's being said about this subject on any other forum, blog or whatever else.  Out of curiosity I did however look on this occasion to see where the straw clutching comes in.

I have to say, for the most part I agree with what's written in the link you posted, better illustrated by inclusion of stills captured from the video - and believe me, I'm not clutching at straws.

I've tried - again - to make myself clear by referencing official documentation to clarify but as usual, when it's something folk do not want to hear, they cock a deaf'un.

I really don't know why I bother.

____________________
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 : 6778
Reputation : 3582
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by JRP on 14.11.17 16:19

@Verdi wrote:
@kinell wrote:Isn't Eddie trained to bark if he smells cadaverine?
YES - and that's an emphatic yes !!!  yes
Martin Grime....

"My observation of the dog's behaviour in this instance was that the dog's
behaviour changed immediately upon opening the front door to the apartment.
He will normally remain in the sit position until released and tasked to search.
On this occasion he broke the stay and entered the apartment with an above
average interest. His behaviour was such that I believed him to be 'in scent'
and I therefore allowed him to free search without direction to allow him to
identify the source of his interest. 



Up to now Eddie has not barked although he is said to be "in scent"




He did so alerting in the rear bedroom.



Now Eddie has barked as he has found a location where the scent is stronger.


If Eddie barked simply when he smelled cadaverine he would have barked when he was "is scent", therefore I believe he is trained to bark when he has found a strong source, an item or location where he feels the scent emanates from.

JRP

Posts : 552
Reputation : 498
Join date : 2016-03-07
Age : 60
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by skyrocket on 14.11.17 16:45

Tell me @Verdi as the following is the main suggestion/conclusion of the blog article that @BlueBag highlighted (as rubbish) but you for the 'most part agree with' - are you stating that you believe Martin Grime is anything but honourable? Or, alternaively that he is incompetent.


'But as Eddie DID NOT alert to cuddle cat (once removed from sideboard) after returning to the room with the sideboard in, then there is a distinct possibility that cuddle cat could have been hidden in the sideboard between the time Eddie alerted and they subsequently left the room and the time that Eddie and PC Grime returned to the room where PC Grime then removed cuddle cat from the sideboard'.


You either accept Martin Grime/Eddie and their professional reputations or you don't.

The British Police did (apart from OG and Jersey for reasons apparent); the FBI did; Mark Harrison did; the PJ did; I do.

You're very fond of admonishing posters for commenting strongly on matters that they are not expert in themselves - perhaps on this occasion you may like to take your own advice; it's actually quite a sensible course of action.


avatar
skyrocket

Posts : 609
Reputation : 598
Join date : 2015-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by JRP on 14.11.17 17:20

In the video above, 

at 1.38 Eddie begins to sniff around the floor area near to and behind the curtain, he then sniffs the bag next to the curtain, he then goes back to sniffing the area around the curtain.
At 1.49 he goes back to the bag, sticks his snout in, and lifts cuddle cat from the bag and throws it into the centre of the room.

He doesn't bark at this point, but he spent roughly 10 seconds in that area around the wall, curtain and bag, more time than he spent in any other area up to this point in the video.
Perhaps this is why Martin Grime wanted Eddie to have another sniff at cuddlecat.

In a post above, Eddie alerted to the key fob, the key fob was also alerted to when it was placed in a sand tray.
Perhaps there was need for a second test of this item too?

JRP

Posts : 552
Reputation : 498
Join date : 2016-03-07
Age : 60
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Forensics Revisited

Post by BlueBag on 14.11.17 17:47

@Verdi wrote:
@bluebag wrote:Here is the straw clutching blog where the straw clutching is going on:

https://madeleinemccannthetruth.wordpress.com/2012/02/25/cuddle-cat/

I'm not particularly interested in what's being said about this subject on any other forum, blog or whatever else.  Out of curiosity I did however look on this occasion to see where the straw clutching comes in.

I have to say, for the most part I agree with what's written in the link you posted, better illustrated by inclusion of stills captured from the video - and believe me, I'm not clutching at straws.

I've tried - again - to make myself clear by referencing official documentation to clarify but as usual, when it's something folk do not want to hear, they cock a deaf'un.

I really don't know why I bother.
The blog said Eddie showed no interest in the toy.

I hope you don't agree with the blog on that?

It was a patent lie.
avatar
BlueBag

Posts : 4402
Reputation : 2219
Join date : 2014-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

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

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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