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!

Eumenides:  What the dogs said Mm11

Eumenides:  What the dogs said Regist10

Eumenides: What the dogs said

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Eumenides:  What the dogs said Empty Eumenides: What the dogs said

Post by Verdi on 28.04.19 12:46

Eumenides:  CMOMM member 'tigger'

Saturday, 4 June 2016



Using Tracker Dogs and Search and Rescue Dogs is to follow and reconstruct a route that a person may have taken. This is done by using ‘target scents’, items used by the person which provide the dogs with that person’s scent. A blanket, a towel and clothing believed to have been used by Madeleine were provided by the family for this purpose.

Human beings lose approximately 4000 plus skin cells a minute and each cell is unique to that person, these dogs are capable of locating just one single cell.

The Search and Rescue Dog teams are specifically trained to find human scent and have to regularly meet certain standards and tests to prove their competence.

The scent trail the dogs detected and followed just happens to be one that does not appear to correspond with a route which would be considered a normal route taken by Madeleine during their stay in PdL – this in itself is an important factor to consider given that at least four dogs all independently followed the same scent trail at different times and on different days.

The Search and Rescue dogs are trained to locate a scent no matter how much it is intermingled with other odours and dependent on environmental conditions, can detect that scent when it is days old. There will always be a question as to whether the scent was new and could it have dispersed, however this does not answer how or why days apart the dogs followed the same scent trail, clearly whatever the scent trail was, it didn’t appear to disperse.

The odds of all the dogs following the same trail by chance are too great given the number of variants in this case (by variants I mean the number of places where Madeleine should have left a scent trail prior to her going missing). This in itself could be an indication that all the dogs picked up what looks like the ‘freshest’ trail and even located it days apart. .

Eumenides:  What the dogs said Maddietrail

The strange route the dogs took consistently.
The night of the 3rd: a phone call to Trish Cameron at 23.40 by Gerry McCann: (CARTAS ROGATORIAS (FILE 5) Pages 64 to 65—Witness statement of Alexander James Cameron 2008.04.15)

‘On the night of Thursday, May 3, 2007, Patricia received a telephone call from Gerry informing us of the disappearance of Madeleine. Gerry [..] seemed frustrated with the slowness of the searches in Portugal, with the fact that the borders had not been closed, and with the fact that sniffer dogs were not being used. ‘

This alleged phonecall (John McCann stated that he was on the phone with Gerry at the same time) was less than an hour after the GNR had finally been called, the alarm having been raised just after 22.00. As will be shown dogs did turn up and in my view had interesting things to say.


Silvia Batista: ‘The deponent remained in the living room for a while, with the GNR officers, Gerry and the other group members that were there in a frenzy, going in and out and speaking on their mobile phones. She noticed that none of the group members, including the child’s mother and father, were busy looking for her. [..] other group members walked in and out and spoke on the phone, apparently concerned about informing the press about the event. [..] the father showed his concern and also asked both for the press to be alerted and for dogs to be brought in for the search.’ Unquote

Processos Vol XIII – Pages 3491 – 3505 :

[..] At 00.40 [..] the GNR post commander requested reinforcements from two sniffer dog teams from the Portimao territorial group [..].
At 01.00 [..] telephone contact was made with an official from the Queluz GNR school, with the aim of their releasing search and rescue dog teams, seeing as these are specially trained to find missing persons, which is not the case with the Portimao sniffer dogs, which are essentially patrol dogs.

II Development of Action:
On 4th May [..] the Lagos Post Commander ordered searches for the child to take place and contacted officers who were at home, forming a force of nine officers who searched during the night and the early morning.

At 02.00 they arrived at P da L and began searching with the Portimao sniffer dog teams, the terrain searches were extended until the morning with the dogs and officers on the scene as well as the night guard and local people who volunteered to help in the searches that took place throughout the night. [..] searches took place along the entire perimeter of the OC [..]
At 08.00 three officers with 4 search and rescue dogs from Queluz arrived at the scene, these dogs immediately began to operate.
[..] it was agreed to reinforce and extend the foot searches and reinforcement from the search and rescue dog team was requested, which arrived at P da L at 23.00 with 3 more sniffer teams for a total of six officers and eight specialized dogs. Unquote

Processos Volume V – Pages 1335 – 1337 Witness Statement 16/5/2007. Carlos Manuel Carvalho Lacäo:
[..] On 4th May he was called at about 01.15 when he was asleep at home, requesting him to appear at the Lagos GNR post as a small girl had disappeared. After arriving at the GNR post with his colleagues Morais and two dogs (Numi and Kit), German Shepherd dogs, which made up the search team, they immediately left for P da L. They arrived at about 02.30.

When they arrived at the scene, they entered the McCanns’ apartment by the front door, and entered the living room where there were some PJ officers as well as the McCann couple. They just talked to some colleagues from the PJ and asked for a piece of clothing that Madeleine had worn or used recently. They were given a pink/orange blanket that the child had been covered with in her bed.
They began searching with the dogs from the main entrance to the apartment, having given the blanket to his dog Numi to smell and begin to search. The route initially taken was from the front entrance door to the passageway between Blocks 4 and 5, along the corridor and then along the passage that leads past the entrance to the small reception to the resort’s swimming pool. [..] his dog’s speciality is patrolling although the dog also has some training in ‘tracking’. [..] between 0400 and 0700 basically the only people searching were the witness, his colleague and another GNR officer. Unquote

Processos Vol V Pages 1333-1334 Armando Augusto Morais
On 4th May he was called at about 01.15, he arrived at the OC at about 1.55, accompanied by the officer Laçao.They presented themselves to Sergeant Duarte from the GNR Lagos post and were informed by him of the disappearance of a small girl from the resort. There were other GNR officers present at the scene, but he does not remember their names. There were also PJ officers present.
After having established exactly where the girl had disappeared from, he was given a piece of her clothing by one of his colleagues, whose name he does not remember. Unquote

03-Processos, volume III Pages 785 to 788 Witness Statement of Pedro Miguel Esteves Fernandes
Date: 2007.05.09
Occupation: GNR Officer (Dogs: Rex and Zarus)

[..]His role was to use the dogs' skills by allowing them to sniff a towel which had supposedly been used by the minor in question.
- That after the dogs were given this scent from the towel and near apartment 5A of block 5, the first sniffer dog headed to the door of that apartment. Immediately afterward, he turned to block 5, using a circumvented route to block 5, and came to the road between this block and the leisure area of the resort (pools, restaurant, etc), and turned to the left, or around the referred to apartment and headed to the main road.
Having reached there, (the dog) crossed the street (Francisco Gentil Martins) and, next to the wall of block 6, once the street was crossed, turned right and headed towards the area of the contiguous car park. More specifically (the dog) went next to a lamp post, smelling the ground there.]
After searching that zone, he again crossed the road and headed toward the entrance to the pool and restaurant area, and smelled the door which was closed at that hour. He turned again to the parking zone and stopped or lost the scent at this point. - When he effected the same operation with the second dog, in general, this dog took the same route and headed to the light post and showed interest there and ended by losing the scent at this point. It should be stated that the one difference is that this second dog did not head toward the entrance to the restaurant and pool zone. But he does state that the dogs followed a 'scent trail', a signal for the animal who was working. He is certain that they were not conditioned in any direction. None of the dogs used in this search action, after having smelled the towel, went into block 5 but headed to the zone which gives access to the road between the apartment and the leisure area. He states it should be noted that the second dog may have been conditioned by the original path taken by the first sniffer dog as he may have smelled the first dog's path taken.[..]- Yesterday (08/05/07) around 23H45, this search action was repeated but was centred on the dogs inside blocks 5 and 4 of the resort. He adds that in this type of operation, given the time that had lapsed, and with the heat that could already be felt, the results obtained may be highly relative given that the dog will confirm all the scents it comes across. It is certain the dog will react to more active scents, namely because the apartment is occupied. Also, any noise perceived by the dog in the apartment may make the dog loose interest.
- Initiating the diligence, the first sniffer dog, after having smelled the towel used in the previous operation, began searching, it being certain that next to the doors of some apartment he demonstrated major interest whilst he did not even approach others. In none of these actions did the dog give him a signal that he had caught the scent of the missing child. It is certain however, that near apartment 5J, 5H and 4G, that the dog showed major interest in smelling the doors and the immediate areas. He states that next to 5H, there were two bags of rubbish which may condition the dog. Just outside apartment 4G was a tray with plates, cutlery and cloth napkins, apparently used. It is certain that this apartment is the one where the missing child's parents were lodged (at the time). In relation to the dog's interest at doorway 5J, the same may have been conditioned by the presence of people inside the apartment.
- After completing the search in the interior of block 5, verandas and apartment access, and whilst in the exterior, the sniffer dog took the same route he had taken on 04/05/07, being the road between that apartment and the leisure area-pool sand restaurant, and headed toward the same parking area. There he lost the scent of the search.

The second dog was submitted to the same operation. He too showed interest in the door of apartment 5J. Here he got up on his hind paws to the parapet of the veranda and raised his head in such a way as to catch the odour. As mentioned previously, this interest may be due to various factors but it is certain that at this location the dog scented an intense odour. In the exterior, the sniffer-dog immediately took the first road, heading toward the parking area next to block 6, and there lost the scent.

03 Processos, volume III Pages 762 to 765 Witness Statement of Antonio Freitas Silva
Date: 2007.05.09 Occupation: 1st Sergeant GNR Location: GNR-Queluz
The deponent states that:
[..]- He remembers that on the 4th of May of the current year, around 23H00, they attempted to tentatively identify and thus reconstruct the path taken by the missing minor. They gave the dogs a Turkish bath towel which was supposedly used by the child in question. This operation was realised by two different dogs.
- That after having given the sniffer dog the towel and next to the residence of the missing girl, more specifically, next to apartment block 5A and 5, the first sniffer dog headed toward the door of that apartment. Immediately afterward, he headed in the direction of block 4, returned around block 5, and came down a road that exists between this block and the leisure area (pools, restaurants, etc). He turned right; in the direction of the aforementioned apartment and headed toward the main road. There, he crossed the street and next to the wall of block 6, turned right, and headed toward the contiguous parking area. More concretely, he headed next to a light post and sniffed the ground around that post. After this, he crossed the street again and headed toward the access zone to the restaurants and pool area, sniffing the door which was closed at that time. He again went to the parking zone, and at that point, lost the scent.
- When carrying out this operation with the second dog, he followed the same route, took the same direction and headed toward the light post in the parking lot mentioned above. He sniffed the area and at that point appeared to have lost the scent. The only difference was that this dog did not head toward the entrance of the restaurant or the pool area.
- None of the dogs used in this search, after having been given the towel supposedly used by the child, entered into block 5 but went immediately to the street between the apartment and the leisure area. It should be taken into account that the second sniffer dog may have been conditioned by the first sniffer dog. That is to say that in the case of doubt, the second dog may have followed the second of the first.
[..]- The initial diligence carried out with first sniffer dog, after having sniffed the towel used in the previous operation, began searching and showing interest in some doors leading to other apartments. He did not show any interest or even approach other apartments. In none of these actions did the dog give the signal to his trainer, Soldado Fernandes. It is certain however, that the dog signalled next to apartments 5J, 5H, and 4G. He showed great interest in sniffing these doors and the immediate areas. Next to door 5H there were two bags of rubbish and the odour may have distracted the dog. Outside 4G was a tray of plates, cutlery and cloth napkins that had apparently been used. This apartment is where the parents of the missing child were staying (at the time). Concerning apartment 5J, the same may have been conditioned by the presence of people in the interior or he could have sniffed an odour that needed to be confirmed.
- He states that after the search inside block 5, and whilst in the exterior, the sniffer dog took the same route on 04.05.07, being the existent road of that apartment and the leisure area (pools and restaurant) and then went to the same parking area. At that point, the scent was lost. This situation may be related to the fact that the biggest concentration of odours are in that area and due to the fact that odours are better preserved near walls and away from major winds. It is certain that upon reaching the main road and turning right is where the biggest concentration of odours exist. This is where the dog lost interest.
- The second dog was taken through the same operation and also showed interest at the door of apartment 5J. This same dog jumped on his hind paws to the parapet of the veranda and raised his head as though in search of an odour. As related above, this interest could have been the result of various factors but it is certain that in this area the scent was intense. In the exterior, the sniffer dog immediately headed to the parking area next to block 6 and there apparently lost the scent.

13- Processos Vol XIIIa page 3517. Annex B. Report on the Sniffer Dog search and Rescue Team.

The sniffer dog search and rescue team of the GNR was sent to Vila da Luz [..] the team was composed as follows:

Sergeant Silva – Dog: Timmy

Officer Cortez – Dog: Sacha

Officer Sousa – Dog: Kolly/Cookie

Officer Rosa – Dog: Oscar (Lisbon)

Officer Martins- Dog: Fusco (Lisbon)

Officer Fernandes- Dog: Rex/Zarus.

[..] After arriving at the scene, the first three members of the team, the officers gathered some information from the girl’s parents about the places they tended to frequent with the children during their stay in P da L up until now, the parents replied that the only areas that their daughter would frequent since their arrival, was Praia da Luz beach, always accompanied by babysitters and resort pool area, where there was also a playground. Unquote

(According to the book, Maddie went to the beach once, it rained, they stayed for about 15 minutes having ice cream, near but not on the beach. The other occasion might have been the boat trip on Thursday, although there is no definite proof of this. The place where Maddie would have been most of the time was the crèche and the dogs never went anywhere near the crèche. But to continue..)

At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team).

Beginning to follow the track using Rex, from the door of apartment 5A, he would always head in the direction of Block 4, leaving block 5 the dog would turn to the left, pass by a metal access door to a path existing between the apartments blocks to the leisure area [..] using the dog Zarus, who in general terms ended up following the same route as Rex and having the same behaviour.

[..] (on the 5th, 6th and 7th May searches were widened to surrounding areas and wells, rocks verges of EN125 and land up to 2 km distant from P da L).

7th May: At about 23.00 searches were begun. After Rex was given the girl’s clothing to sniff, he began to search on the ground floor of block 5 and when he passed the door of apartment 5A [..] the dog altered its behaviour, sniffing with greater intensity than he had done before. Apartment 5J was also checked as the dog had been more agitated than before [..] the same kind of search was carried out using the dog Zarus which in general terms showed the same behaviour in the same places as Rex had done. [..]

On 10th May at about 20.10 [..] searches were carried out in all of the apartments belonging to blocks 4 and 5 of the OC, two tracker dogs and two search and rescue dogs being used for this operation, adopting the same methods as those used on 7th May, just that this time the apartments were all open [..] when they arrived at apartment 5J they began to sniff with intensity at the entrance door. [..] after entering the apartment it was observed that the odour came from close to the fridge, which was open and contained some rotting meat and vegetables. unquote

With reference to the fridge: ‘errm the, I know that again, you know Kate and Gerry had had problems err with I think it was the blinds in their flat and the fridge ..’ (Rogatory interview Dr. David Payne April 2008).

It was cold, several days needed to have passed before the food began to rot and presumably the shutters were down. It was allegedly a washing machine that needed attention in 5A, a fridge is hardly so complicated as to need instructions for use, which apparently was all that was needed for the washing machine.

Why was the food ‘near’ the fridge and not in it? The fridge was open, which is sensible, so why was there rotting food in the apartment? This story simply makes no sense. All it tells us is that a/the fridge was ‘sensitive’, hence Dr. Payne’s leaking brain. The GNR dogs found it interesting, however, Eddie the cadaver dog had no interest in 5J at all.

With reference to the clothes: children’s clothes were washed in the OC laundry on Saturday the 5th of May. They were of different sizes so may have included those belonging to Maddie. The day after she disappeared, the British Ambassador was instrumental in denying the PJ access to clothing belonging to Madeleine.

From ‘madeleine’ – page 86
'At about nine o’clock we all went out on to Rua Dr. Agostinho da Silva to find out what was going on and to look out for the PJ. [..] According to the PJ files, to which we did not have access until August 2008, two patrol dogs were brought to Praia da Luz at 2 am on 4 May and four search-and-rescue dogs at 8am. I don’t remember seeing any police dogs until the morning and if there were any specific police searches overnight, they were not apparent. The only searches I was aware of were those carried out by ourselves, fellow guests and the Mark Warner staff.
According to the files, the tracker dogs did not go out until 11pm on 4 May. At some point in the first twenty-four hours (I could not say when exactly, but probably that morning) I recall oe of the GNR patrol officers asking us for of Madeleine’s clothing or belongings to enable these dogs to identify her scent. I fetched the pink princess blanket she took to bed with her every night, which they took, and some of her clothes, which they didn’t .‘ unquote

This is very neat. Kate ‘forgets’ that she handed over the blanket around 2.30 to Sergeant Silva. She never saw the 8.00 am dogs either, although she handed over the blanket then according to her, despite her offering far more useful clothing – clearly another sensitive point here as the officer states clearly that they asked for recently worn clothing and got a blanket. No fools the GNR, both Officer Fernandez and Officer Silva note specifically that they were later using a towel said to have been used by the minor.

Main question is: why was Gerry McCann so keen to have tracker dogs? Dog didn’t go anywhere near the point where the Smith family met the e-fit man. So the chances of a recently carried Madeleine there are near zero. A recently carried non-Madeleine is perfectly possible and therefore the evidence of the Smiths is valid. However, the most interesting route was that taken independently by four dogs. Considering the private and sheltered paths that run along and round the back of the apartments, one might take another look at the testimony of Derek Flack. (see below)
Another question: why did the dogs have no interest in Block 5? But made a strange detour round it ending up in a small parking area of block 6? Four times?

Facts: 4th May 2007

Two patrol dogs at 02.30 am
Officers Lacäo and Morais with dogs Numi and Kit. Patrol dogs.
Four search and rescue dogs at 8.00 am (from Queluz) these are presumably Timmy, Sacha, Kolly and Cookie, Numi and Kit do not appear to have been used again.

At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit (Lisbon) and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team).

01 Volume 1a page 200 to 205 Witness Testimony Derek Flack 06/05/2007:
[.] a witness following the events on the morning or early afternoon of 2nd or 3rd May [..] on the late morning or early afternoon of either 2nd or 3rd May, not being certain which, the deponent and his partner were out walking in the vicinity of their home. [..] they went up the from their home to Rua Dr. Agostinho da Silva then down Rua Dr. Francisco Gentil Martins where the ‘Ocean Club Gardens’is situated.

At that time as he passed the residential block he noticed a light commercial vehicle (in all respects the same as an Opel Corsa Van) white in colour [..]
When going down the (Rua Martins) he passed an individual standing on his left at the beginning of a path and at the entrance of a small car park opposite the reception of the resort.
At the point they passed the individual the deponent had seen him face-on because he (the man) was facing the opposite direction to which he was walking and appearing to be watching attentively movements (occurring) adjacent to the parked vehicle.
- Asked, the deponent said that he noticed the above because he had a high instinct for vigilance due to his participation where he lived in England in a neighbourhood-watch in which suspicious persons or movements were watched for [..]
The deponent wished to clarify that he was convinced that the man was not one of the many tourists who frequented that area, considering his features and physical appearance.
Asked to elaborate further he said that the van was situated close to the gateway on the side of the building (which gateway led to the veranda of the apartment in question (5A).
For the rest, he adds that after having reflected specifically on the incidents he concluded that it was the man’s deliberate focus (fixation) on the area in which the events that gave rise to the investigation occurred.
Urged to reveal details about the area around the van, the deponent could not be certain itf the vehicle was directly next to, slightly above or slightly below the gateway.
However, he was sure that it was a very short distance from, and directly in the path of the gate. unquote

Eumenides:  What the dogs said 01_VOLUMEIa_Page_153

Sketch plan of the locations where Derek Flack saw the van and the man watching 5A.

Joao Carvalho, who reported this sighting to Dr. Goncalo |Amaral on the 5th of May, notes in his report: ‘he adds that near to where the individual was watching, on the other side of the road, was a parked vehicle, van type, white, with a person (he does not remember whether the person was inside or outside the vehicle). He cannot describe that person. ‘

Eumenides:  What the dogs said 01_VOLUMEIa_Page_205
The e-fit made by Derek Flack of the man he saw full-face.

The fact is that this sighting matches up extremely well with the curious movements of the dogs. The fact that Derek Flack does not remember which day it was could be contributed to a desire to match the sighting to the official day Madeleine disappeared. But on the second of May we have those 12 voicemails and on the previous evening there is more unusual activity on the phone of Kate McCann. (see footnote 1)


nothing in the creche where Madeleine went every day

nothing in any of the apartments of block 5 (except 5J where the CSI dogs later found nothing of interest)

nothing along the route to the Rua de Escola Primeria
nothing on the beach (where she’d allegedly been that day)
nothing near the tennis courts where she’d been active
nothing at the Tapas where she had tea around 5.00PM on 3/5
nothing at the poolside where she’d been sitting in the sun having the ‘last photo’ taken just hours earlier
nothing resembling the route taken by Tanner man
Four dogs reacted consistently and separately, on different days, to a route between the front door of 5A and a small car park in front of Block 6 across the road.
The PJ were only interested in the sighting by Derek Flack in terms of suspect persons watching 5A prior to the disappearance. This was on the assumption that Madeleine was alive and well on the 3rd, which is not likely considering the fact the dogs consistently ignored the locations where she would have been most of the time.

Footnote 1:
KM 01-May phone activity





GM 2/5 phone activity -On 2nd May 2007 GM received 12 voicemails Did not respond to any, absorbing information. The 12 voicemails fell into 4 groups. Between each group, others texted/called. (source: kikoratton tweets)








a telephone number that has not yet been identified, on 2nd May 2007 sent 14 written SMS messages to Gerald McCann and another 4 on the day following Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
Footnote 2:

These are extracts from two posts by Dr. Martin Roberts and can be found on:
By Dr Martin Roberts
30 May 2009


A lengthy statement by GM to ITV on 25th May, 2007 opens the door somewhat.
GM: "We truly believe that a member of the public holds the information to unlock where Madeleine is being kept.
( from another interview)the McCanns answer a question concerning their faith in their friends.
Q: " you have full confidence in them?"
KM: "One hundred percent. One hundred percent."
(voice off camera – 'of everyone?')
KM: "Of our friends, yes."

This tells us that there is at least one person (not a holidaying friend) in whom KM does not have full confidence. Recollecting the discussion of Madeleine having been 'taken away from us permanently', this is a further indication of third party involvement.

Wednesday 2nd May 2007

By Dr Martin Roberts

05 August 2011 THIRTY DAYS

"He cannot say exactly, but he thinks that on Monday or Tuesday MADELEINE had slept for some time in his bedroom, with KATE, as she had told him that one or both twins were crying, making much noise.
"Back to Thursday..."

Back to Thursday. Without ever having visited Wednesday, either on the 10th or the week previously (the 4th), although Kate manages to mention it, just, during her earliest interview:

"Apart from that, on Wednesday or Thursday, Madeleine and the other children went sailing at the beach...
Unquote (the 4th and 10th refer to the two statements made to the PJ by GM)

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

Posts : 14116
Join date : 2015-02-02

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

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