Why was some of the dogs alerts 'not' investigated?

by Guest 05.12.11 15:24

From Martin Grime's Rogatory Interview:

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

Question: 'Based upon your experience with the dogs, can you specify whether the positive signals given by them have always matched the scientific results''

Martin Grime: 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.

I wonder why some alerts never got forensically tested? Why was some of the dogs alerts 'not' investigated? 302873

Why was some of the dogs alerts 'not' investigated? 302873

by Liz Eagles 05.12.11 15:52

Stella wrote:From Martin Grime's Rogatory Interview:

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

Question: 'Based upon your experience with the dogs, can you specify whether the positive signals given by them have always matched the scientific results''

Martin Grime: 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.

I wonder why some alerts never got forensically tested?

Seems to me all things forensic have been discredited and are therefore invalid...this just gets weirder.

by Guest 06.12.11 8:44

I'm thinking G5J maybe? Why was some of the dogs alerts 'not' investigated? 302873

by Guest 07.12.11 9:16

Stella wrote:Martin Grime: 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.

Just wanted to point out, that both the PJ Final Report and the inspection report given by Martin Grime, does not mention the locations of these other "alert signals", or specifically whether it was just a cadaver alert, or cadaver and blood. I sense by Martin's comment about it not being investigated by the "appropriate agencies", that specs of blood were found and ignored.

We can clearly see that when the process was handed over to the Portuguese Prosecutor by Rebelo, they were not in possession of the full facts. Perhaps someone should take this matter up with the AG and find out why.

by Guest 07.12.11 11:27

I just realised that I have been dismissing, subconsciously, most of the evidence of the dogs. Wrongly! When I first started to read about the case, I read right left and centre, and I didn't really know who was who. I also read the blog dogsdon't lie, and I thought it was the official blog of Martin Grimes owner of the dogs. And I thought is was so unprofessional to call yourself the dad of your dogs, and to put up a picture of a tombe with Madeleine's name on it. So whenever the evidence on here was discussed I thought yeah yeah, that was from that biased man, so who knows if it is true.
I just re-read it, and it is not written by him, how dumb of me...
So, long way to a question, couldn't we just find a way to contact Martin Grimes and ask him about this. Would he be forbidden to talk about it?

by Guest 07.12.11 12:15

He has been approached in the past and he will not comment on anything for obvious reasons.

Martin Grime (note no s at the end) has never had a blog.