I think that was incredibly foolish remark. To question the training of the actual canines used in the search would be one thing, but to cast aspersions on a tried and true method used by emergency workers in recovery efforts all over the world is just ludicrous.
I absolutely agree that Hogue seems to have gone in the wrong direction and way up over the top in trying to make the canine searches sound questionable through the particular remarks referenced.
Keeping in mind that (I think) the average person on the street might not have the knowledge about and huge respect for "canine investigators" that a lot of us have gained through WS (and other, in-the-field experience in the case of some here, I know), I nevertheless have to think Hogue knows better. Whom is he aiming to convince -- the judge, the public? Could work, I guess.
I agree that challenging the specific training and methods of the particular search teams actually involved would make a lot better sense. I would guess they are saving that for later, if it is needed.
ETA: Just wanted to clarify that I personally do not know anything much one way or another to credit or discredit the teams -- am just saying that
approach makes better sense to me. As far as I remember, from the online research we did about them here in earlier days, they looked pretty darn good! We don't know much, though, about the actual protocol of the searches that were conducted that day, IIRC.
Regarding the dog search, though,
if the sequence of events and description of the circumstances the defense has laid out, according to the article linked below, is accurate -- and I know the prosecution may not agree that they are accurate -- I do question whether the dog search was legal. If not, could be a
big problem for the prosecution!
...Stephen did not respond and did not sign anything, a defense motion notes. He was then placed in the Macon Police Departments RV-like Mobile Command Center that was parked at the apartment complex. They say he remained there for several hours while various police officers came and went.
Sometime that afternoon, a pair of cadaver dogs, led by their handler, sniffed around McDaniels apartment while McDaniel sat in the apartment on a sofa.
This search, one motion contends, was conducted without a warrant and without consent.
<bolding by me>
http://www.macon.com/2012/12/15/2286427/documents-in-giddings-slaying.html
I know we heard testimony by Patterson at the commitment hearing concerning the dog search and also, later, remarks about it by Winters at one of the bond hearings. Might be interesting to look back and see how they phrased things, as far as whether the search was with Stephen's consent or not.