The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm 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 your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Confusion About Cadaver Odour

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

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Thanks

Post by Swizzlestick on 19.10.12 10:44

candyfloss wrote:

WITH THANKS TO INES
09 Processos Vol IX Page 2461














09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2461
Policia Judiciaria

NUIPC 201/07. GALGS

Terms of Joining

On this date I join to the case files the translations of the verbal reports made in English by the police sniffer dog trainer Martin Grime, referring to the sniffer dog inspections carried out with the cadaver odour detection dog Eddie and the human blood detection dog, Keela.

These translations were made working from the audio-visual recordings of each of the inspections.

These terms of joining were elaborated and will be signed.

Portimao 23 August 2007

Inspector Paiva



One is a CSI Dog, i.e. Blood, and one is an EVRD dog ie Cadaver, below Grimes explains the different reactions i.e. one barks, that is Eddie Cadaver, Keela CSI dog freezes. They usually are used seperately. ............................





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







CANINE VEHICLE SEARCHES.

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

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

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





As you see above, the dogs are used seperately and both trained to alert to different things ie blood and cadaver, and also giving different signals when they alert.......... freezing and barking.

All above taken from this page..........

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

Thanks for this Candyfloss, it's a great help. There should be clips that the public in general can access, showing Eddie "freezing". Surely, this is good evidence, they've not been wrong in 200 cases, and have a 100% record.... I am sure they're right.
avatar
Swizzlestick

Posts : 103
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-10-14

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by LG1968 on 19.10.12 11:27

@sami wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
@LG1968 wrote:[...]

Eddie alerts to blood and cadaver odour. When he has alerted then the CSI dog is brought in to the specific location to see if the alert relates to blood. Only if Keela the CSI dog does not alert can Grime know that Eddie has alerted to blood.

The reason for Keela is simple. To check which alert Eddie has given.
***
That's the other way around.
IF Keela reacts too, it might be blood. If she doesn't it must be cadaver.


Yes so if Eddie does not react, they do not (usually) deploy Keela.

Yes but Eddie did react at the car door and they did deploy Keela and Keela found blood at the car door where Eddie reacted (it turned out to be the key fob with Gerry's blood on it in the door compartment) and Keela also found blood in the boot of the car (according to the Almeida report) or body fluids (according to the AG report).

So there is, as Martin Grime says, only a possibility that there was any cadaver odour in the car. There is no proof of it and never will be unless (again as Martin Grime says) there is further evidence to corroborate the dog.

Anyone who claims that there is positive proof (as some have done on this thread) of cadaver odour in the car is going directly against what Martin Grime has said.

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

"No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert." means that it doesn't prove a thing and could never be used by any police anywhere in any court.

LG1968

Posts : 55
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-10-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by Guest on 19.10.12 11:57






Eddie clearly indicates cadaver odour by barking loudly


PJ Summary Report:

- cadaver odour dog:
* signalled the key of the vehicle

- blood dog:
* signalled the key of the vehicle


(The PJ Summary Report does not mention the indication of cadaver odour around the base of the driver's door - yet Eddie can be clearly seen in this photograph, and accompanying video, indicating cadaver odour at that point.

Presumably it has not been recorded as such because Eddie is actually indicating that cadaver odour is coming from inside the vehicle - rather than from the car door itself - and, as Martin Grime explains, he does not need to indicate a precise point in the car - simply that there is cadaver odour there. Keela is then used to pin down precise points)




http://www.mccannfiles.com/id161.html#aug9
You can try and twist it any way you like, but how many times have cadaver dogs signalled and been correct, when people are buried deep beneath the ground........ and no blood present whatsoever. They detect the scent. That is what Eddie was doing, he sat next to the car door and barked. Keela then goes in and sniffs all areas closely, then freezes when she finds even the smallest speck of blood, sometimes invisible to the naked eye..
There have been many cases lately where dogs have alerted, no body found and only very circumstantial evidence has found them guilty. I'm sure you know which they are.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by Springers are FAB on 19.10.12 12:03

@LG1968 wrote:
@sami wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
@LG1968 wrote:[...]

Eddie alerts to blood and cadaver odour. When he has alerted then the CSI dog is brought in to the specific location to see if the alert relates to blood. Only if Keela the CSI dog does not alert can Grime know that Eddie has alerted to blood.

The reason for Keela is simple. To check which alert Eddie has given.
***
That's the other way around.
IF Keela reacts too, it might be blood. If she doesn't it must be cadaver.


Yes so if Eddie does not react, they do not (usually) deploy Keela.

Yes but Eddie did react at the car door and they did deploy Keela and Keela found blood at the car door where Eddie reacted (it turned out to be the key fob with Gerry's blood on it in the door compartment) and Keela also found blood in the boot of the car (according to the Almeida report) or body fluids (according to the AG report).

So there is, as Martin Grime says, only a possibility that there was any cadaver odour in the car. There is no proof of it and never will be unless (again as Martin Grime says) there is further evidence to corroborate the dog.

Anyone who claims that there is positive proof (as some have done on this thread) of cadaver odour in the car is going directly against what Martin Grime has said.

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

"No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert." means that it doesn't prove a thing and could never be used by any police anywhere in any court.

LG: I think most people reading this know that the alerts are not good enough in themselves as proof without other corroborating evidence. I think what some have difficulty getting their heads around is the fact that Eddie is trained to alert to BOTH cadaver AND blood and therefore if he alerts then Grime has no way of knowing which until Keela is brought in. If she alerts in the same place then this suggests its blood rather than cadaver. This I believe is the case with the car and the nub of the whole issue.

____________________

"Go, go, go, said the bird: human kind
Cannot bear very much reality."
(T.S. Eliot, Burnt Norton)
avatar
Springers are FAB

Posts : 60
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-08-23
Location : Leicestershire

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by LG1968 on 19.10.12 12:19

candyfloss wrote:




Eddie clearly indicates cadaver odour by barking loudly


PJ Summary Report:

- cadaver odour dog:
* signalled the key of the vehicle

- blood dog:
* signalled the key of the vehicle


(The PJ Summary Report does not mention the indication of cadaver odour around the base of the driver's door - yet Eddie can be clearly seen in this photograph, and accompanying video, indicating cadaver odour at that point.

Presumably it has not been recorded as such because Eddie is actually indicating that cadaver odour is coming from inside the vehicle - rather than from the car door itself - and, as Martin Grime explains, he does not need to indicate a precise point in the car - simply that there is cadaver odour there. Keela is then used to pin down precise points)




http://www.mccannfiles.com/id161.html#aug9
You can try and twist it any way you like, but how many times have cadaver dogs signalled and been correct, when people are buried deep beneath the ground........ and no blood present whatsoever. They detect the scent. That is what Eddie was doing, he sat next to the car door and barked. Keela then goes in and sniffs all areas closely, then freezes when she finds even the smallest speck of blood, sometimes invisible to the naked eye..
There have been many cases lately where dogs have alerted, no body found and only very circumstantial evidence has found them guilty. I'm sure you know which they are.

Yes we know that Eddie was alerting to the inside of that car door and very probably to the inside of the car door.

And how do we know that? Because in Martin Grime's own report he goes on to say that after Eddie alerted to the car door Keela was deployed and found in that very same car door the key and fob where after forensic testing Gerry McCann's dried blood was later shown to be present.

The Renault Scenic vehicle –
number plate 59-DA-27 was removed to the third floor of the underground
car park and was subjected to a forensic search by officers from the
Scientific Police Laboratory and another sniffer dog inspection that
began at 03.49 on 7th August by the dog KEELA, which detected human
blood remains, the following results were noted:

03.53 – the dog “marked” a zone on the right inferior side of the inside of the luggage compartment of the vehicle;

04.11 – the dog “marked” the compartment on the driver’s side,
which was seen to contain the vehicle’s key, of a plastic electronic
card type, with a key ring from the Budget car rental agency.

So Eddie was very probably interested in the door because of the dried blood of Gerry McCann and not cadaver odour.

The only other alert on that car was to boot where a tiny specimen of "blood" (Almeida) or "body fluids" (AG) was found by Keela.

LG1968

Posts : 55
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-10-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by LG1968 on 19.10.12 12:22

@Springers are FAB wrote:
@LG1968 wrote:
@sami wrote:
Châtelaine wrote:
@LG1968 wrote:[...]

Eddie alerts to blood and cadaver odour. When he has alerted then the CSI dog is brought in to the specific location to see if the alert relates to blood. Only if Keela the CSI dog does not alert can Grime know that Eddie has alerted to blood.

The reason for Keela is simple. To check which alert Eddie has given.
***
That's the other way around.
IF Keela reacts too, it might be blood. If she doesn't it must be cadaver.


Yes so if Eddie does not react, they do not (usually) deploy Keela.

Yes but Eddie did react at the car door and they did deploy Keela and Keela found blood at the car door where Eddie reacted (it turned out to be the key fob with Gerry's blood on it in the door compartment) and Keela also found blood in the boot of the car (according to the Almeida report) or body fluids (according to the AG report).

So there is, as Martin Grime says, only a possibility that there was any cadaver odour in the car. There is no proof of it and never will be unless (again as Martin Grime says) there is further evidence to corroborate the dog.

Anyone who claims that there is positive proof (as some have done on this thread) of cadaver odour in the car is going directly against what Martin Grime has said.

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

"No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert." means that it doesn't prove a thing and could never be used by any police anywhere in any court.

LG: I think most people reading this know that the alerts are not good enough in themselves as proof without other corroborating evidence. I think what some have difficulty getting their heads around is the fact that Eddie is trained to alert to BOTH cadaver AND blood and therefore if he alerts then Grime has no way of knowing which until Keela is brought in. If she alerts in the same place then this suggests its blood rather than cadaver. This I believe is the case with the car and the nub of the whole issue.


Yes, the fact that Keela alerted specifically to that door as well and that forensic tests showed that there was blood on the key fob in the door compartment means that both dogs were very probably alerting to that blood and no cadaver odour was present.

LG1968

Posts : 55
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-10-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by PeterMac on 19.10.12 12:23

"No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert." means that it doesn't prove a thing and could never be used by any police anywhere in any court.
How interesting then that they immediately started coming up with excuses for each of the alerts, - 6 corpses, nose bleed, mosquito splatted on wall, rotting meat, sea bass, dirty nappies and so on ad nauseam, instead of saying they were false positives.
They can't have it both ways. Well actually they can. For the moment.
"Ce qui s'excuse, s'accuse"
"Wer sich entschuldigt, sich beschuldigt"




____________________

avatar
PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 159
Join date : 2010-12-06

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by Guest on 19.10.12 12:31

@PeterMac wrote:
"No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert." means that it doesn't prove a thing and could never be used by any police anywhere in any court.
How interesting then that they immediately started coming up with excuses for each of the alerts, - 6 corpses, nose bleed, mosquito splatted on wall, rotting meat, sea bass, dirty nappies and so on ad nauseam, instead of saying they were false positives.
They can't have it both ways. Well actually they can. For the moment.
"Ce qui s'excuse, s'accuse"
"Wer sich entschuldigt, sich beschuldigt"




Quite.

I take that to mean the compartment on the dashboard on the right side, not the door. So away from the door.

04.11 – the dog “marked” the compartment on the driver’s side,
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by LG1968 on 19.10.12 12:34

@PeterMac wrote:
"No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert." means that it doesn't prove a thing and could never be used by any police anywhere in any court.
How interesting then that they immediately started coming up with excuses for each of the alerts, - 6 corpses, nose bleed, mosquito splatted on wall, rotting meat, sea bass, dirty nappies and so on ad nauseam, instead of saying they were false positives.
They can't have it both ways. Well actually they can. For the moment.
"Ce qui s'excuse, s'accuse"
"Wer sich entschuldigt, sich beschuldigt"




I have no idea why the McCanns said any of that, if in fact they did.

I am simply looking at the files and at what Martin Grime the expert said, because it is him I trust in all this, not anyone else.

He is clear that without corroborating evidence the alerts are not sufficient as proof.

I understood you were a former police officer and would be able to understand that.

LG1968

Posts : 55
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-10-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by LG1968 on 19.10.12 12:36

candyfloss wrote:
@PeterMac wrote:
"No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert." means that it doesn't prove a thing and could never be used by any police anywhere in any court.
How interesting then that they immediately started coming up with excuses for each of the alerts, - 6 corpses, nose bleed, mosquito splatted on wall, rotting meat, sea bass, dirty nappies and so on ad nauseam, instead of saying they were false positives.
They can't have it both ways. Well actually they can. For the moment.
"Ce qui s'excuse, s'accuse"
"Wer sich entschuldigt, sich beschuldigt"




Quite.

I take that to mean the compartment on the dashboard on the right side, not the door. So away from the door.

04.11 – the dog “marked” the compartment on the driver’s side,

Sorry I take it to mean the compartment on the driver's side. The driver's side being the left side which is if you watch the video precisely where the dog Eddie alerted and where we are told in Grime's report Keela alerted. As there is no other compartment on a drivers side other than in the door it must mean the compartment in the door.


I think you might be forgetting that this is a continental car not a British one.

LG1968

Posts : 55
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-10-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by Guest on 19.10.12 12:44

No, I haven't forgotten it is a foreign car. Most cars have a luggage rack underneath the dashboard on the drivers side, for items.

It is very clear why you are here LG1968 , are we going to start on the 'coconut' next, or perhaps the second hand furniture in 5a, oh we had a taster of that in the other thread. Strange 2 newcomers suddenly arrive together, open new threads, and start questioning Mr Grimes dogs. We have discussed this ad nauseum, you have your views, and we have ours. We will just go round and round, so we will have to agree to differ.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by Da Troof on 19.10.12 12:50

While the dog alerts are interesting there are plausible innocent explanations for them.

It is possible that there was no cadaver odour in the hire car. Eddie could have been signalling blood odour. None of the DNA recovered from the car can be shown to be Maddie's. It is possible that some of it is Maddie's, but it is also possible that it is not.

There was cadaver odour indicated in the apartment i.e. a spot where Eddie indicated but Keela did not. This could have been transfer from Kate's clothing if she had been in contact with corpses. Similarly the cadaver odour on Kate's clothing.

There was blood found in the apartment behind and near the sofa, but none of it could be shown to definitely belong to Maddie.

I also think that the McC's appear far more confident when dismissing the dog evidence than they do when talking about the events of May 3rd 2007.

I still have the feeling there is something fishy about the abduction story the McC's have always pushed. The confused/misleading statements, deleted phone calls/messages, stolen wallet, shutters up/down, fingerprints, unusual behavior, body language in interviews etc all point to the McC's knowing something they are not telling, but I don't know what that something is.

Da Troof

Posts : 80
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-09-29

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by Springers are FAB on 19.10.12 12:53

@Da Troof wrote:While the dog alerts are interesting there are plausible innocent explanations for them.

It is possible that there was no cadaver odour in the hire car. Eddie could have been signalling blood odour. None of the DNA recovered from the car can be shown to be Maddie's. It is possible that some of it is Maddie's, but it is also possible that it is not.

There was cadaver odour indicated in the apartment i.e. a spot where Eddie indicated but Keela did not. This could have been transfer from Kate's clothing if she had been in contact with corpses. Similarly the cadaver odour on Kate's clothing.

There was blood found in the apartment behind and near the sofa, but none of it could be shown to definitely belong to Maddie.

I also think that the McC's appear far more confident when dismissing the dog evidence than they do when talking about the events of May 3rd 2007.

I still have the feeling there is something fishy about the abduction story the McC's have always pushed. The confused/misleading statements, deleted phone calls/messages, stolen wallet, shutters up/down, fingerprints, unusual behavior, body language in interviews etc all point to the McC's knowing something they are not telling, but I don't know what that something is.

Hallelujah Da Troof...somebody understands what I'v been trying to say. Your thoughts in this post are mine exactly.

____________________

"Go, go, go, said the bird: human kind
Cannot bear very much reality."
(T.S. Eliot, Burnt Norton)
avatar
Springers are FAB

Posts : 60
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-08-23
Location : Leicestershire

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by LG1968 on 19.10.12 13:04

candyfloss wrote:No, I haven't forgotten it is a foreign car. Most cars have a luggage rack underneath the dashboard on the drivers side, for items.

It is very clear why you are here LG1968 , are we going to start on the 'coconut' next, or perhaps the second hand furniture in 5a, oh we had a taster of that in the other thread. Strange 2 newcomers suddenly arrive together, open new threads, and start questioning Mr Grimes dogs. We have discussed this ad nauseum, you have your views, and we have ours. We will just go round and round, so we will have to agree to differ.

OK we differ. But I am posting the evidence and actual words of Martin Grime to support my views. For example about their only being the possibility of cadaver odour not actual proof of it.

As for new threads. I am not sure what you are meaning as I have not yet started any.

And I have no objection to other people holding different views at all. We are all trying to get to the truth and everyone's opinion may differ.

I was thinking of asking a couple of questions about another part of the dog search (and that would entail opening a new thread) as I was advised by Sami to look at the video. In doing so, I spotted some things which I cannot explain and was going to ask for help.

I will do it now and will see if anyone is able to help. The answers may be simple and I might just have missed something.

LG1968

Posts : 55
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-10-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by LG1968 on 19.10.12 13:08

@Springers are FAB wrote:
@Da Troof wrote:While the dog alerts are interesting there are plausible innocent explanations for them.

It is possible that there was no cadaver odour in the hire car. Eddie could have been signalling blood odour. None of the DNA recovered from the car can be shown to be Maddie's. It is possible that some of it is Maddie's, but it is also possible that it is not.

There was cadaver odour indicated in the apartment i.e. a spot where Eddie indicated but Keela did not. This could have been transfer from Kate's clothing if she had been in contact with corpses. Similarly the cadaver odour on Kate's clothing.

There was blood found in the apartment behind and near the sofa, but none of it could be shown to definitely belong to Maddie.

I also think that the McC's appear far more confident when dismissing the dog evidence than they do when talking about the events of May 3rd 2007.

I still have the feeling there is something fishy about the abduction story the McC's have always pushed. The confused/misleading statements, deleted phone calls/messages, stolen wallet, shutters up/down, fingerprints, unusual behavior, body language in interviews etc all point to the McC's knowing something they are not telling, but I don't know what that something is.

Hallelujah Da Troof...somebody understands what I'v been trying to say. Your thoughts in this post are mine exactly.


And me!

There are valid questions to be asked though and we should all be willing to listen to those questions, think about them and listen to the answers that others provide because none of us has a monopoly on the truth about this case.

LG1968

Posts : 55
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-10-17

Back to top Go down

To explain.

Post by Swizzlestick on 19.10.12 13:24

candyfloss wrote:No, I haven't forgotten it is a foreign car. Most cars have a luggage rack underneath the dashboard on the drivers side, for items.

It is very clear why you are here LG1968 , are we going to start on the 'coconut' next, or perhaps the second hand furniture in 5a, oh we had a taster of that in the other thread. Strange 2 newcomers suddenly arrive together, open new threads, and start questioning Mr Grimes dogs. We have discussed this ad nauseum, you have your views, and we have ours. We will just go round and round, so we will have to agree to differ.

Hi Candyfloss, just to explain (and I could be wrong) if you're mentioning me as one of the newcomers - the only reason I asked about the dogs is that I've only just taken interest in the case; maybe I should have explained that at the start. I'm not questioning the truth or reliability of the dogs atall, just wanted to get it clear in my own mind.
avatar
Swizzlestick

Posts : 103
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-10-14

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by tiny on 19.10.12 13:30

If people are quering the dogs why the need for the excuse of dirty nappies and rotting meat? can some one answer me that
avatar
tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2010-02-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by statsman on 19.10.12 13:38

If people are quering the dogs why the need for the excuse of dirty nappies and rotting meat? can some one answer me that

It's not just that. Why did Gerry McCann say that they are "incredibly unreliable" and that we should "ask the dogs" if he thought there was a perfectly rational explanation for their behaviour?
avatar
statsman

Posts : 118
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2012-02-29

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by tiny on 19.10.12 13:42

@statsman wrote:
If people are quering the dogs why the need for the excuse of dirty nappies and rotting meat? can some one answer me that

It's not just that. Why did Gerry McCann say that they are "incredibly unreliable" and that we should "ask the dogs" if he thought there was a perfectly rational explanation for their behaviour?

Because old gerry knows how good they really are.
avatar
tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2010-02-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by Da Troof on 19.10.12 13:48

@statsman wrote:
If people are quering the dogs why the need for the excuse of dirty nappies and rotting meat? can some one answer me that

It's not just that. Why did Gerry McCann say that they are "incredibly unreliable" and that we should "ask the dogs" if he thought there was a perfectly rational explanation for their behaviour?

I have wondered about this too. He does appear very confident when he says they are "unreliable........incredibly unreliable". It is a very odd comment, but then he does appear to be a very odd man. Perhaps (and I'm just guessing here) he knew that without corroborating evidence (e.g. DNA or a body) the dog alerts could be dismissed. His choice of words may have been poor, but again they often are.

Just to make my position plain. I'm not querying the dogs or their handler. It remains possible that Maddie died in 5a and that her body was stored (in a freezer?) and later transported in the hire car. BUT it is also possible that this is not what happened at all.

Da Troof

Posts : 80
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-09-29

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by tiny on 19.10.12 13:56

As i have said before,WHY the need for dirty nappies and rotting meat if the mccanns thought the dogs soooo unreliable.

only Mr Grimes knows how his dogs work,but unfortunatly Mr Grimes is not allowed to talk about it(so i read somewhere,so dont quote me on that)
avatar
tiny

Posts : 2274
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2010-02-03

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by Guest on 19.10.12 13:57

Yes, could be dismissed, although not much evidence in the Prout, Pilley or Lane case was there.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by Da Troof on 19.10.12 14:03

@tiny wrote:As i have said before,WHY the need for dirty nappies and rotting meat if the mccanns thought the dogs soooo unreliable.

only Mr Grimes knows how his dogs work,but unfortunatly Mr Grimes is not allowed to talk about it(so i read somewhere,so dont quote me on that)

Tiny, in a way you answer your own question! If the dogs are "unreliable" they will alert to rotting meat or dirty nappies. I think it is possible the McC's were truly surprised that the dogs alerted to the car. I also think it is possible that they "knew" the alerts had to be "false" because they "knew" Maddie had never been in the car so they tried to come up with alternative explanations.....not very bright.

Interestingly.....................IF they did "know" that Maddie had never been in that car, HOW did they "know" this? My first thought when hearing this news back in summer 2007 was ....who hired the car before them? There must be a link to the abductor/killer. How amazing that the McC's would end up hiring the same car! BUT this thought doesn't appear to have occurred to them ...perhaps because they ALREADY "knew" that Maddie couldn't have been in the car!

Da Troof

Posts : 80
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-09-29

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by Springers are FAB on 19.10.12 14:06

@Da Troof wrote:
@tiny wrote:As i have said before,WHY the need for dirty nappies and rotting meat if the mccanns thought the dogs soooo unreliable.

only Mr Grimes knows how his dogs work,but unfortunatly Mr Grimes is not allowed to talk about it(so i read somewhere,so dont quote me on that)

Tiny, in a way you answer your own question! If the dogs are "unreliable" they will alert to rotting meat or dirty nappies. I think it is possible the McC's were truly surprised that the dogs alerted to the car. I also think it is possible that they "knew" the alerts had to be "false" because they "knew" Maddie had never been in the car so they tried to come up with alternative explanations.....not very bright.

Interestingly.....................IF they did "know" that Maddie had never been in that car, HOW did they "know" this? My first thought when hearing this news back in summer 2007 was ....who hired the car before them? There must be a link to the abductor/killer. How amazing that the McC's would end up hiring the same car! BUT this thought doesn't appear to have occurred to them ...perhaps because the ALREADY "knew" that Maddie couldn't have been in the car!

I seem to remember reading somwhere that one of the McCann family DID think that....that the car must have been hired by the abductor before the Mccann's. Not sure where I read it or who said it, might have beenKate's mum...will have a shufty round and see if I can find it.....

____________________

"Go, go, go, said the bird: human kind
Cannot bear very much reality."
(T.S. Eliot, Burnt Norton)
avatar
Springers are FAB

Posts : 60
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2012-08-23
Location : Leicestershire

Back to top Go down

Re: Confusion About Cadaver Odour

Post by statsman on 19.10.12 14:14

I think what musn't be forgotten is that the odds of these dogs alerting to the McCann's apartment and car and to nowhere else that they were tested on is around half a million to one.

So there has to be something related to the McCanns to explain this and I can't see it being rotten meat, sea bass or dirty nappies.
avatar
statsman

Posts : 118
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2012-02-29

Back to top Go down

Page 4 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
McCanns apt & hire car


Blood and cadaver alerts
dismissed by UK Government


Retired DCI Gonçalo Amaral: "The English can always present the conclusions to which they themselves arrived in 2007. Because they know, they have the evidence of what happened - they don't need to investigate anything. All this is now a mere 'show off'."

Retired murder DCI Colin Sutton: "I would also like to make the point that Operation Grange was so restricted from the start as to be destined to fail."

Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley made public on national TV that Operation Grange is a complete fraud.

Ex-DCI Andy Redwood had a "revelation moment" on BBC's Crimewatch on 14th October 2013 when he announced that Operation Grange had eliminated the Tanner sighting - which opened up the 'window of opportunity', in accordance with their remit, to allow the fake abduction to happen.

Despite "irrelevant behaviour" from blood and cadaver dogs in the McCann's apartment, on Kate McCann's clothes, and in the car they hired three weeks after Maddie disappeared, Ex-Chief Inspector, Ian Horrocks, said: "The thought that Kate and Gerry McCann had anything to do with the death of their daughter is frankly preposterous."

Gerry McCann called for example to be made of 'trolls'. SKY News reporter Martin Brunt doorstepped Brenda Leyland on 2 October 2014. She was then found dead in a Leicester hotel room. Brenda paid the price. She paid with her life.

Ex-Deputy Chief Constable, Jim Gamble QPM, congratulated SKY reporter, Martin Brunt, on twitter for doorstepping Brenda Leyland on behalf of Gerry McCann.

Prime Minister Theresa May introduces Prime Suspect Kate McCann to Royalty: The Duchess of Gloucester.

Good Cop Down: The reality of being a police whistleblower
https://goodcopdown.wordpress.com/