Forensics Revisited

Cadaver odour was detected in the shrubbery below apartment 5a. This (along with many other things) baffles me. I understand that a body would have to be in a certain place for at least 90 minutes before an odour could be detected.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]source [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] on 28.10.13 1:24.  How could a dead body lay in a flower bed for that amount of time without it being seen? Is it possible that cadaver odour from clothing or effects that had been in close contact with a body could transmit the odour to another region. To put it plainly, would it be feasable to have a dead person's clothing, bundled up and hidden in the garden for about 90 minutes waiting to be disposed of?

It's believed that Maddie died behind the sofa (where Eddie alerted) and lay there for 90 mins or so, she was then placed in the missing blue sports bag in the wardrobe (where Eddie alerted), then moved and possibly the blue bag was put in the flowerbed temporarily before being put in the car (where Eddie alerted).

If that makes any sense...

So on that understanding, cadaver odour can be transmitted to a sports bag, and then transmitted from the bag to the shrubbery. Forgive me if I appear naive about these things which I confess I am. So if odour can be transmitted to other areas that come in contact with odorous items, why didn't Gerry's show indications of odour as he must have come into close contact with Kate's check trousers?

wills wrote:Cadaver odour was detected in the shrubbery below apartment 5a. This (along with many other things) baffles me. I understand that a body would have to be in a certain place for at least 90 minutes before an odour could be detected.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]source [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] on 28.10.13 1:24.  How could a dead body lay in a flower bed for that amount of time without it being seen? Is it possible that cadaver odour from clothing or effects that had been in close contact with a body could transmit the odour to another region. To put it plainly, would it be feasable to have a dead person's clothing, bundled up and hidden in the garden for about 90 minutes waiting to be disposed of?

It takes approx 90 minutes from the time of death for the cadaver fluid to be produced....after that time it's constantly oozing out of the body, so it wouldn't have to be in the flower bed long for the fluid to transfer.

wills wrote:So on that understanding, cadaver odour can be transmitted to a sports bag, and then transmitted from the bag to the shrubbery. Forgive me if I appear naive about these things which I confess I am. So if odour can be transmitted to other areas that come in contact with odorous items, why didn't Gerry's show indications of odour as he must have come into close contact with Kate's check trousers?

No you're not being naive.  Cadaver odour can exist by transference which is quite likely to be the case with the EVRD alert to the shrubbery in the small garden area below apartment 5a - I believe it was said to be only a passing interest to Eddie the EVRD,  which suggests to me it was more likely something placed there for a short period as opposed to direct contact with an actual corpse.

Gerry McCann's close contact with his wife's harlequin pants is not something I wish to contemplate  :lol: but it's a good point you make.  I've often wondered why Kate McCann would continue to wear clothes that may have come into direct contact with a corpse but again, contamination could have been by transference.  The items moved to a sterile environment for inspection by the dogs were boxed-up together, so it's quite feasible KM's checkered trousers could have been contaminated by some other item - cuddlecat for example.  Cuddlecat who, like Madeleine, never had a voice.
 
If you think about it there is a pattern here.  Body in the blue 'now you see it now you don't' sports bag, either being transported from or to apartment 5a, being momentarily placed in the shrubbery whilst checking that the coast is clear for the next plan of action.  A scent was also detected by the EVRD on apartment 5a veranda - the garden area (shrubbery) was I believe directly below the veranda.

Verdi wrote:
Gerry McCann's close contact with his wife's harlequin pants is not something I wish to contemplate  :lol: 

Verdi. I almost lost my cup of tea reading that post!  

JulieC wrote:

Verdi wrote:
Gerry McCann's close contact with his wife's harlequin pants is not something I wish to contemplate  :lol: 

Verdi. I almost lost my cup of tea reading that post!  

Thank gawd you weren't eating .

Cadaver Odour in the Shrubbery​ !

Sounds like something from Cluedo 

Or an Agatha​ Christie book 

Sorry​ wills , no​ disrespect meant to a genuine question​    

What is the distance down from the verandah to the shrubbery and how private is that area? I've looked at photos, but not found any which make these things clear. Two possibilities are in my thinking:
1. The body, presumably in a bag, was lowered from the verandah to be collected from the shrubbery for removal, either by the Mccanns themselves or an accomplice. The purpose would be to avoid a person being seen leaving the apartment with a bag, as the patio doors and front door are more in view.
2. Is the distance down sufficient to make a fatal fall credible? Madeleine would then have had to lie dead there for 90 minutes or more unfound to leave odour, which is why I ask about the privacy of the spot.
Apologies if I'm asking the obvious and retreading old ground.

No disrespect taken Sandancer. But what I fail to understand is could a 3 year old child be placed into a tennis bag? I take it(correct me if I am wrong) that the pink blanket also disappeared. Could the cadaver odour be from a corpse or items that were in close contact with the same?
I also read somewhere that Kate mentioned that previous to the 'holiday' she had visited 6 families to issue death certificates wearing the check trousers. Who with any sense of decorum would visit bereaved people dressed in check trousers?
But it still doesn't answer the question, if odour can be transferred from one in close contact with another, why does the the other close contacted party show no hint of odour eg Gerry? I would consider it an almost impossibility for just one person to place a 3 year old child single handedly into a tennis bag.
Sorry if I digress.

wills wrote:No disrespect taken Sandancer. But what I fail to understand is could a 3 year old child be placed into a tennis bag? I take it(correct me if I am wrong) that the pink blanket also disappeared. Could the cadaver odour be from a corpse or items that were in close contact with the same?
I also read somewhere that Kate mentioned that previous to the 'holiday' she had visited 6 families to issue death certificates wearing the check trousers. Who with any sense of decorum would visit bereaved people dressed in check trousers?
But it still doesn't answer the question, if odour can be transferred from one in close contact with another, why does the the other close contacted party show no hint of odour eg Gerry? I would consider it an almost impossibility for just one person to place a 3 year old child single handedly into a tennis bag.
Sorry if I digress.

1.  David Paynes talks of sports bag during rogatory interview in April 2008..

1485 "What about a kit bag' Would they have a kit bag with them''
 

Reply "Err he certainly didn't have a great big tennis bag or a, you know, err I mean I used to be a squash, a semi-professional squash player and you know they certainly didn't have anything that I would call a kit bag from days when I played''

1485 "Yeah.'

Reply "You know, a lot of sport, err if they had a rucksack with some water in that would be, you know, about as big as it got, you know a small rucksack. But it certainly wasn't a big tennis, you know, things that you could put a tennis racquet in.'

1485 "Yeah.'

Reply "There was nothing of that size that you could hide a, a tennis racquet in or anything like that, it would have been just purely, if they had anything''

1485 "Yeah.'
 

Reply "It would have been something that had their water in.'

1485 "So as opposed to a bag it'd be something like a rucksack, if at all''

Reply "If, if at all, yeah.'

2.  Cadavar odour by transference already covered.

3.  Pink blanket much like the sports bag - now you see it now you don't.

4.  Kate McCann never said she had attended any deaths prior to the holiday.  It was a claim allegedly made by a family member reported by the UK press.

5.  How many people would you expect to be needed to handle the body of a three year old child?

Verdi wrote:
If you think about it there is a pattern here.  Body in the blue 'now you see it now you don't' sports bag, either being transported from or to apartment 5a, being momentarily placed in the shrubbery whilst checking that the coast is clear for the next plan of action.  A scent was also detected by the EVRD on apartment 5a veranda - the garden area (shrubbery) was I believe directly below the veranda.

The steps which led to the gate on the road are directly under the verandah.  The small shrubbery is underneath the steps.

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

The cadaver odour found in the shrubbery also puts paid to Kate's statement that the abductor exited the apartment with Madeleine via the bedroom window which overlooked the car park at the opposite end of the apartment. I  think Kate said this to bolster their statements of being able to see the apartment from the Tapas bar and make them appear to be " dining in the garden". They could see the patio but not the bedroom where Madeleine and the twins were sleeping.

The UK police can investigate the fund.
Since the fund was created on the lie that Maddie was alive and that she had been abducted by a paedophile stranger and then the dogs indicated that a body had lain in the apartment long enough for cadaverine to be detected by dogs, cadaverine that was also found on certain items of clothing including a child's red t shirt which is unexplained since when would a child come into contact with a corpse in the normal run of life and would surely have been something the mccanns would have remembered, ie they went to an open casket funeral and that is why cadaverine is on the t shirt type of excuse.
Plus that body fluids were found in the apartment and in the hire car, with a 15/19 markers match with the remaining 4 too degraded to identify at the time though with advances in forensic science, in the past 10 years that may well have changed.

Since the mccanns and chums plus clarrie have told us Maddie is dead on multiple occasions, it means the fund was set up fraudulently and is thus open to criminal charges.

It also means that all the fund raising for the search which the mccanns have never physically done, nor most of their investigators  via their online shop as well as donation buttons for PayPal is also based on a lie and thus fraudulent.

It means they could possibly face investigation by the police from every country where they asked for donations either directly via the media such as interviews etc or via their website with donations in various currencies.
Wire fraud, obtaining money and services by deception.

Yes the UK police could and perhaps should investigate the fund but I doubt they will find anything incriminating that could lead to a prosecution.  The McCann defence league have always been well and truly cosseted by prime high profile legal pundits and a variety of affiliated useful outlets that can fill the holes faster than the McCanns can themselves dig.  The 'fund' might be only borderline legal but we all know what that means in terms of pounds shillings and pence.

Technically, as regards the 'search', I don't recall it was ever said that the 'fund' was specifically searching for a living Madeleine to bring back safely to her home.  A dead person could likewise be searched for and the body or remains returned to the family for a respectful burial and closure.

What's more, the dog alerts did not clarify that a corpse had lain in apartment 5a long enough for cadavarine to develop, the scent could have been by transference - the most likely scenario in my opinion considering the items of clothing etc. that were signaled by the dogs.  I believe that was the opinion of the dogs trainer/handler, Martin Grimes, at the time.  It's late now but tomorrow I will check it out.

Personally I'm in no doubt that the fund is fraudulant but proving it through the legal process is another matter altogether.  I don't credit the McCanns with a great deal of intelligence (cunning most definitely) but their ring of fire I believe to be impenetrable.  Why else would they still be free to roam the planet ten years after the event?

'Transference' does not hold good for blood/body fluids under the tiles.

As for 'safe', as in ‘To secure the safe return to her family….’ from the 'objects' clause in the accounts, even CM would be laughed at if he tried to spin it that the fund was set up, in the full knowledge that MM was dead, to secure the 'safe' return of a dead body.

Eddie and Keela are not "clock watchers" they are there to do the job they are trained to do. They succeeded in alerting to cavadine odour and human blood  in apartment 5a in very specific locations. 

A "body" must have been in apartment 5a long enough for cavadine odour to be present in order  for it to be detected. If the "body" was moved to a different location and lay for a while that would leave the "scent" which is alerted to. 

Blood under the tiles  suggest that a "body" lay bleeding for enough time for the fluid to seep onto and leak under the flooring.


No one had previously "died" or been found dead in apartment 5a. 

Madeleine is the only child missing from the family who holidayed in that apartment. 

It has to be said that if the "abduction" scenario is the only remit the MET are adhering to, if they have asked themselves the question of said "abductor" why he or she removed a corpse from the apartment, least move it in different locations ..never have I heard of a burglar turned abductor to then hold a vigil with a corpse prior to absconding?  

As for the "fund" 

Money for Madeleine...really? 

Money from Madeleine more like....


Inheritance takes on a new meaning?

aquila wrote:

I'm not the brightest lightbulb on a Christmas tree Verdi, I don't pretend to be but you're going to have to explain (to me at any rate) your interpretation of the cadaver and blood dog findings.

It's not my interpretation nor opinion aquila, it's what's on public record by way of the PJ forensic reports.  As you know, the forensic reports are long, complex, technical in parts and somewhat repetitive - it will take time to locate the relevant bits.

Firstly, it's very important to recognize the two distinct areas here - 1. the forensic investigation and subsequent analysis of apartment 5a undertaken by the PJ team and 2. the forensic examination undertaken by Eddie the EVRD and Keela the CSI dogs, under the guidance of their handler/trainer Martin Grime.  The two areas are often fused into one which only adds confusion and  a general misunderstanding of the subject matter.

It is also important to acknowledge the fact that the dogs can only alert to the scent of cadavarine and/blood - without a body they cannot tell the identity of the person, this must be corroborated by forensic analysis.  A widely known fact but nonetheless worthy of repetition as it's sometimes conveniently overlooked.

Contrary to popular belief, I don't have hours of spare time to dedicate to CMoMM, so in case I don't have the opportunity to delve futher into the subject, here's something to set the ball rolling..

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

If read carefully, for the most part it's written in simple non-technical terms.  Remember though, the afrementioned two areas under discussion - the PJ forensic examination and that of Martin Grimes with Eddie and Keela.

Gerry McCann said " Ask the dogs"

They were

And I believe them!


Dogs don't and do not have the ability to lie!

MayMuse wrote:Eddie and Keela are not "clock watchers" they are there to do the job they are trained to do. They succeeded in alerting to cavadine odour and human blood  in apartment 5a in very specific locations. 

A "body" must have been in apartment 5a long enough for cavadine odour to be present in order  for it to be detected. If the "body" was moved to a different location and lay for a while that would leave the "scent" which is alerted to. 

Blood under the tiles  suggest that a "body" lay bleeding for enough time for the fluid to seep onto and leak under the flooring.


No one had previously "died" or been found dead in apartment 5a. 

Madeleine is the only child missing from the family who holidayed in that apartment. 

It has to be said that if the "abduction" scenario is the only remit the MET are adhering to, if they have asked themselves the question of said "abductor" why he or she removed a corpse from the apartment, least move it in different locations ..never have I heard of a burglar turned abductor to then hold a vigil with a corpse prior to absconding?  

As for the "fund" 

Money for Madeleine...really? 

Money from Madeleine more like....


Inheritance takes on a new meaning?

I do wish folk would just read what's written and stop blowing everything out of proportion.

The forensics - read the files!

The Fund - it's highly unlikely, if investigated, the UK police will find anything that could lead to a prosecution.  Full stop!

Verdi wrote:

MayMuse wrote:Eddie and Keela are not "clock watchers" they are there to do the job they are trained to do. They succeeded in alerting to cavadine odour and human blood  in apartment 5a in very specific locations. 

A "body" must have been in apartment 5a long enough for cavadine odour to be present in order  for it to be detected. If the "body" was moved to a different location and lay for a while that would leave the "scent" which is alerted to. 

Blood under the tiles  suggest that a "body" lay bleeding for enough time for the fluid to seep onto and leak under the flooring.


No one had previously "died" or been found dead in apartment 5a. 

Madeleine is the only child missing from the family who holidayed in that apartment. 

It has to be said that if the "abduction" scenario is the only remit the MET are adhering to, if they have asked themselves the question of said "abductor" why he or she removed a corpse from the apartment, least move it in different locations ..never have I heard of a burglar turned abductor to then hold a vigil with a corpse prior to absconding?  

As for the "fund" 

Money for Madeleine...really? 

Money from Madeleine more like....


Inheritance takes on a new meaning?

I do wish folk would just read what's written and stop blowing everything out of proportion.

The forensics - read the files!

The Fund - it's highly unlikely, if investigated, the UK police will find anything that could lead to a prosecution.  Full stop!

...Who is blowing what out of proportion [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Please do enlighten?

Considering I have read the reports, and have never blown anything out of proportion! 
Let's get this in perspective... 

The "scent" Eddie is trained to detect was alerted to in apartment 5a has come from "transference" as per your earlier post? 
 Verdi wrote... snipped... What's more, the dog alerts did not clarify that a corpse had lain in apartment 5a long enough for cadavarine to develop, the scent could have been by transference - the most likely scenario in my opinion considering the items of clothing etc. that were signaled by the dogs.  I believe that was the opinion of the dogs trainer/handler, Martin Grimes, at the time.  It's late now but tomorrow I will check it out.


As per Martin Grimes: 
"I have trained and handle two operational specialist search dogs: 
'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)"

Martin Grimes states..."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"

snipped... 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.


So Eddie is trained to detect "cadaverine"... he was "in scent", he was on his mission to seek where this "scent" was coming from. Albeit no body was recovered and even without the presence of a body for him to find, Eddie was "IN SCENT" which I take to mean that Eddie detected the "odour" of a "corpse" ( cadaverine) and this "odour" was pervading the apartment and whilst there was no body to be found in any specific point, Eddie alerted to various locations the "scent" Eddie was trained to detect! These areas were detected possibly because that is where the "scent" was strongest or had accumulated, his nose led him to where he could detect the smell. 


When you first spray perfume it is on the person, the clothing, and it is left lingering in the air ... much the same as cadaverine leaves a lingering "odour", it comes from an original source! Unless someone was with you at the time you sprayed the perfume, no one could say when it was sprayed, or where you put the bottle it came from, they just smell the fragrance which pervades around you. Same as Eddie was "scenting" cadaverine which shows intelligence that at some point a "body" was in the apartment, doesn't it? 


 IF the suggestion is that this  "lingering scent of cadaverine" is simply from transference in all those "located" areas, then are we now to believe that this has perhaps come from the 5 or 6 corpses Kate McCann "visited" prior to the holiday in her explanation as to why Eddie detected what he did? If so then this "transference" should be in most of the other places KM happened to "visit" on holiday, shouldn't it?   And my goodness, working clothes remaining unwashed prior to going on holiday? Ergh! 

If not where has this "scent transference" originated? 
It must be from its original source, and that would be a "corpse" wouldn't it? 

This "transference" resulted in being detected by Eddie in numerous locations ( and on clothing etc ) one of these areas was behind the blue sofa in the lounge of apartment 5a, along with residue of human blood found beneath the tiles in the exact same area as detected by Keela the dog trained to detect human blood.



No body no crime eh? 

MayMuse wrote:Considering I have read the reports, and have never blown anything out of proportion! 
Let's get this in perspective...

Yes, let's. 

You can't just pluck out random passages from the forensic reports to prove a point - that's not how it works.  The whole subject of the forensic evidence has to be taken into consideration and thus put into perspective, before selecting appropriate text for the purpose of commentary.  This is why I initially said that it will take time considering the length, detail and complexity of the subject as regards the disapearance of Madeleine McCann.

Concerning the subject of forensics, my original response to a fellow member's post related only to the following statement, I quote  ".... the dogs indicated that a body had lain in the apartment long enough for cadaverine to be detected by dogs, cadaverine that was also found on certain items of clothing....".

This statement is fundamentally incorrect, which I have been trying (without much success it would seem) to redress.  I totally understand why the particular phraseology was used but that's beside the point.  CMoMM is read by the thousands - members and guests - it only takes one incorrect statement or facetious comment to set the tongues wagging.  Anyone who has followed this case on the various fora and blogs will be aware of how quickly a false claim will grow legs and then roam around cyberspace for eternity - the cyber grapevine .  Trouble being that there are many people out there who have nothing better to do than propagate lies and rubbish in order to distort or distract from the truth.

So yes, let's do just starting with the dogs credentials ..

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.

CSI HUMAN BLOOD DETECTING DOG

'Keela' The Crime Scene Investigation (C.S.I.) dog will search for and locate
exclusively human blood.

Stop there for a moment to ponder the dogs training, in particular the Enhanced Victim Recover Dog.  This is not a case of bark once for cadavarine bark twice for blood bark thrice for body fluid etc, we can leave that sort of nonsense at the door of the likes of the drole humorist - Clement Freud.

Moving on .. for the moment concentrating only on the dogs inspection of apartment 5a, follow the finger print trail..

Verbal Report by Martin Grime Relating to the Searches Carried out with the Dogs in the Ocean Club Apartments

Apartment 5 A

Ok what was done was we deployed the victim recovery dog into the apartment and by experience and the training of the dog what I first noticed is that as soon as I came in that the dog was very excited and as a handler I can pick up his body language etc and it would appear to me that as soon as he has come into the house he's picked up a scent that he recognises and he has then gone through the apartment trying to source where that scent source has come from and as he has worked through the house the only two places where he picks up enough scent to give me the bark alert are in this bedroom, in this corner where he was barking.

What we have to be able to understand in a situation such as this is in a hot climate with the apartment being closed down, the scent will build up in a particular area. If there isn't a scent source in here, i.e. a physical article where the scent is emitting from, any scent residue will collect in a particular place due to the air movement of the flat, the apartment and what I would say in this case is that there is enough scent in that area there for him to give me a bark indication but the source may not be in that cupboard, the source may well be in this room somewhere else but the air is actually pushing into that corner. But strong indication and I would say its positive for things that he is trained to find, which will be part of a separate debrief.

Moving onto the other rooms once he's found what he thinks he's looking for in this room, and we go into the bathroom and come into this bedroom he loses his interest because he's actually found the source that he was looking for, until we come over here and I think you've got it on video that when he first came in he was quite interested in the sofa but he didn't have access to the back of the sofa and when he's gone behind the sofa what I saw was that approximately in the centre of the wall where the window is, just along the tile area between the tiles and the wall, he's been scenting there a lot stronger than he has anywhere else and the when he's gone out there the second time he has decided yes that's what I'm looking for and that's when he has given me the bark indication.

What we should understand with this dog is that he only barks when he finds something, he won't bark at any other times. He won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or anything like that. The only times I've ever known him bark since I've got him as a small puppy a) for his dinner and that's just excitement and that's one of the training methods we use to teach to bark when we want him to and when he actually finds something, he won't bark at other dogs, he won't bark at strangers, he won't bark when somebody knocks on the door or something like that, so again I would say that's a positive indication.

The second dog that we've seen work today is the crime scene dog Keela. She will only indicate to me when she has found human blood, only human blood and it is only blood and there must be something there physically for her to be able to alert to me that's she has actually found something. At this point over here where the victim recovery dog has indicated, as you saw on the video, the crime scene dog had actually given me what we call a passive indication where she freezes in this spot here which would indicate to me that there is some human blood there. She will find blood that's historically very old and she will find anybody's blood, any human blood, which is important to make sure that everybody knows.
----------

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 aboveaverage 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.

There were no alert indications from the remaining properties. I did however see the dog search in the kitchen waste bins. These contained meat foodstuffs including pork and did not result in any false alert response.
-----

It's all here in the link I previously posted..

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

I think that's enough for the moment.  Pay particular attention to the EVRD dogs training, his reaction to the crime scene and the two alerts in apartment 5a living area where both Eddie and Keela alerted.  Do you think Eddie was alerting to blood residue or cadavarine - or more to the point is it debatable?

As I think I've said before, this area is better left to those with knowledge of forensic science - otherwise the subject is grossly misunderstood/misinterpreted.  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?

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

I have read it all and the FFS report!

Snipped accounts are often used on this forum, it is not to prove a point... I have asked questions, and your response has failed to answer them. 

EVRD dog is Eddie...cadaverine 

CSI dog is Keela...human blood 

 This "topic" is at the core of missing Madeleine and has been debated for years. 

So I ask again,  if this "transference " as you call it is what Eddie alerted to...where did it come from? 
As you are suggesting that it is debatable that Eddie may have alerted to blood? 
If I am not mistaken that was Keela's training and job to do. 
Eddie was as an EVRD. 
Both were taken into the apartment at separate times to avoid any confusion. 


You are correct in that to leave this to those with better knowledge of forensic science!

Oh and the UK FSS became involved because the PJ used them... its in the files and GA's book... possibly something which could be regretful?