Cadaver dog hit on scent in DBs bedroom

[GoodGurl]

Is it unusual for a HRD dog to hit in only one spot? when someone has died in a house, and assuming under suspicious circumstances for the dog to be used in the first place, I don't know but it seems like they might be moved in the course of the coverup and multiple hits are more likely. Just wondering.

 

[Amster]

That doesn't sound like "spin" to me. Sounds like truth.

Do you disagree that the phone call is the one true solid clue in this case? And that so far, it appears they don't know who made the call?

The one real solid clue for me is the hit on human decomp next to the bed where DB says she was passed out....

 

[Oriah]

Is it unusual for a HRD dog to hit in only one spot? when someone has died in a house, and assuming under suspicious circumstances for the dog to be used in the first place, I don't know but it seems like they might be moved in the course of the coverup and multiple hits are more likely. Just wondering.

I don't think we know for sure that there was only one HRD alert in the residence.

But in certain circumstances, yes it is possible for there to be only one location alerted on. It is also possible that more than one location was alerted on. We just don't know.

 

[JeannaT]

The one real solid clue for me is the hit on human decomp next to the bed where DB says she was passed out....

That would have been solid for me, too, had they actually removed some of the carpet in that room.

We can go round and round on this one, and I guess have in the past, but that lost its power as a "clue", I believe, when it appears the second dog didn't confirm the hit.

IMHO.

So to me, that leaves this phone call as the only one thread of a solid lead that needs to be solved.

 

[Amster]

Is it unusual for a HRD dog to hit in only one spot? when someone has died in a house, and assuming under suspicious circumstances for the dog to be used in the first place, I don't know but it seems like they might be moved in the course of the coverup and multiple hits are more likely. Just wondering.

If Lisa died while lying on or wrapped in the blanket or quilt, then why would there be hits anywhere else? IMO, DB killed Lisa by accident or on purpose....maybe by smothering her....while Lisa was lying on or wrapped in the quilt or blanket. Her body was then taken off the quilt or blanket and put in something else....like a duffel bag and disposed of in the river.

 

[Hopeful2]

That would have been solid for me, too, had they actually removed some of the carpet in that room.

We can go round and round on this one, and I guess have in the past, but that lost its power as a "clue", I believe, when it appears the second dog didn't confirm the hit.

IMHO.

So to me, that leaves this phone call as the only one thread of a solid lead that needs to be solved.

BBM: i missed this one

 

[Eileen730]

I'm not aware of any handlers/trainers making these claims on this case, but I could have missed it. I know there was speculation early on during the searches about the length of time the dogs worked because people saw dogs there and saw that the search went on for 17 hrs and somehow turned that into the dogs worked for 17 hours (well, "dogs" may very well have worked for 17 hours straight, the key there is the plural).

In my experience dogs who are pushed into doing any work don't do very well at it. It is a game and it is a job. Working dogs are very different from house dogs. One could write a book on this subject.

In regards to the buried alive, I gotta say, outside of crime scene shows I've never heard of or known anyone who has worked a case like this, I certainly haven't. I suppose that if an otherwise healthy person was stuffed into some box with an oxygen tank so they could stay alive and buried and the dog was only trained in HRD that they could be missed.

I was just wondering only because i remember Jessica Lundsford was burried alive.
I think they should bring the dogs back ... JMO


and thank you for your reply!

 

[JeannaT]

BBM: i missed this one

When I say "appears" I mean I deduced that's likely what happened. They got a cadaver dog hit on the floor by her bed, as per the search warrant, so that's solid information.

Whey they executed the search warrant, there was live video - I don't know if there is a tape anywhere, it was live videowork kind of all day - you could see a dog go in briefly and then come back out. And there was no carpet removed in the room where the previous "hit" was on the floor.

So it seems to me that the second dog didn't confirm the first dog's hit.

 

[Oriah]

I was just wondering only because i remember Jessica Lundsford was burried alive.
I think they should bring the dogs back ... JMO


and thank you for your reply!

Not sarx, but...

I think in Jessica's case, a properly trained HRD dog- if brought to search the neighborhood yards- should have alerted to the shallow grave she was buried in.

I don't know if that was the case or not.

Rest in peace, little one.

(ETA: didn't K9s trail her to Couey's residence? I thought I recalled that. Will have to go back and look.)

 

[Cazzie]

That would have been solid for me, too, had they actually removed some of the carpet in that room.

We can go round and round on this one, and I guess have in the past, but that lost its power as a "clue", I believe, when it appears the second dog didn't confirm the hit.

IMHO.

So to me, that leaves this phone call as the only one thread of a solid lead that needs to be solved.

JMO, we don't know if a second dog(s) confirmed it or not. For all we know, there was more than one dog that hit on the same or different objects or areas, but only one was mentioned to justify the SW.

The HRD dog "hit" that was part of the basis for the SW stated "in an area of the floor near the bed", which wouldn't necessarily mean the carpet. In fact, to me, that wording is extremely awkward if it meant the carpet.

Yep, it's already been gone round and round on that one.

 

[nursebeeme]

When I say "appears" I mean I deduced that's likely what happened. They got a cadaver dog hit on the floor by her bed, as per the search warrant, so that's solid information.

Whey they executed the search warrant, there was live video - I don't know if there is a tape anywhere, it was live videowork kind of all day - you could see a dog go in briefly and then come back out. And there was no carpet removed in the room where the previous "hit" was on the floor.

So it seems to me that the second dog didn't confirm the first dog's hit.

I have never seen it reported that a second dog did not confirm the hit. Also the no fly was instituted to protect the work of the dogs...

pdf of search warrant
http://www.kmbc.com/download/2011/1021/29552734.pdf


eta: I will bump up the dog thread for this discussion

 

[Cazzie]

I doubt it as well. Would just like to see who's stating it, cause it isn't any handler we know.

That's the kind of stuff that media grabs onto and starts spinning when they don't have a clue what they're talking about- thus swaying public opinion. Makes me angry.

Also, it doesn't seem far-fetched, to me, that defense attorneys and others representing someone's interests might proactively feed the media and public on such things as well as other things.

The media tour of the house by CS, including lifting up the un-affixed carpet *might* be a similar example, regardless of a client(s)' innocence or guilt. The basis for the SW mentioned the HRD dog hit as occurring "in an area of the floor near the bed". And some are debunking the validity of the hit becuz some carpeting remained after the SW search ended, and no carpeting was listed as taken during the search.

 

[Oriah]

That would have been solid for me, too, had they actually removed some of the carpet in that room.

We can go round and round on this one, and I guess have in the past, but that lost its power as a "clue", I believe, when it appears the second dog didn't confirm the hit.

IMHO.

So to me, that leaves this phone call as the only one thread of a solid lead that needs to be solved.

BBM:
We have certainly gone round and round on this- but can you please clarify this with a link? I have no idea how anyone would know this (or if they did....would release it publically?)
TIA.

 

[Oriah]

Also, it doesn't seem far-fetched, to me, that defense attorneys and others representing someone's interests might proactively feed the media and public on such things as well as other things.

The media tour of the house by CS, including lifting up the un-affixed carpet *might* be a similar example, regardless of a client(s)' innocence or guilt. The basis for the SW mentioned the HRD dog hit as occurring "in an area of the floor near the bed". And some are debunking the validity of the hit becuz some carpeting remained after the SW search ended, and no carpeting was listed as taken during the search.

Yes.

If it were me (and I admit, I am biased by profession) and one of my HRD dogs alerted to a location in my home where a missing loved one had disappeared from- I'd be frantic with worry.
I mean, frantic.

But we also train using residences as controls, and blind controls.

Idk. This is all very perplexing to me.
I just hope Lisa is safe somewhere.

 

[Darcyline]

BBM:
Wow. Do you mind me asking where you heard/read this?
I'd be interested to know what trainers/handlers are stating this.
TIA.

Hi Oriah-this is from yesterday but I wanted to clarify. When I was talking about people claiming the dogs were abused, forced, or untrained I did NOT mean trainers or handlers are saying that. I meant I see that a lot on random message boards and even in media. It makes me angry because it seems borderline irresponsible to make those drastic claims especially when you do have a bunch of actual dog trainers and handlers clarifying (repeatedly) that this is not the case and I am assuming most of the people making those claims do not have any real knowledge of the area. It feels like (to me) certain people are latching onto that with no real factual basis behind it and I am not sure why. It feels somewhat connected to the issue of some people assuming gross incompetence on LE's part at every turn. I think we need pretty hardcore evidence to assume gross incompetence or abuse whether it is a cop, detective, or dog. If that evidence from any credible source emerges I will trust it, but without it I am going to assume the dogs were highly trained and the dogs weren't abused (which is what I have been hearing from posters and media with actual first-hand knowledge of the subject).

 

[Oriah]

Hi Oriah-this is from yesterday but I wanted to clarify. When I was talking about people claiming the dogs were abused, forced, or untrained I did NOT mean trainers or handlers are saying that. I meant I see that a lot on random message boards and even in media. It makes me angry because it seems borderline irresponsible to make those drastic claims especially when you do have a bunch of actual dog trainers and handlers clarifying (repeatedly) that this is not the case and I am assuming most of the people making those claims do not have any real knowledge of the area. It feels like (to me) certain people are latching onto that with no real factual basis behind it and I am not sure why. It feels somewhat connected to the issue of some people assuming gross incompetence on LE's part at every turn. I think we need pretty hardcore evidence to assume gross incompetence or abuse whether it is a cop, detective, or dog. If that evidence from any credible source emerges I will trust it, but without it I am going to assume the dogs were highly trained and the dogs weren't abused (which is what I have been hearing from posters and media with actual first-hand knowledge of the subject).

Yes- thanks Darcyline. That's what I gathered as well- and wanted to point out that anyone making those types of claims probably has no experience with working dogs. But considering there are some out there who make outlandish claims- well, let's just say I was on high alert.

So sad to me- and completely inaccurate (and disrespectful of) so many working dog 'detectives' and their handlers.

 

[MissFine]

Looking at the "theories" thread, it's amazing how many people completely dismiss the cadaver dog hit like it means nothing. Also amazes me how people have short term memory they seem to forget all of the inconsistencies, lies and omissions in DB's story, "the phones don't call out" (one did), the changes in timeline, the lack of cooperation with police, the FAILED polygraph, the alleged phone number on DB's hand, putting the boys in her bedrooom with her, (So she could keep an eye on THEM? I'm sure it was AFTER midnight), and her supposed "black out". I think it's entirely possible DB was doing meth and didn't fall asleep AT ALL, just faked it for JI because the baby was missing. Most likely JI has no idea what has really happened. and DB knows EXACTLY what happened.

bbm
:welcome:
You and I are sitting on the same couch.

 

[Elley Mae]

At what point in "death" does a body emit "decomposition?" This is what keeps coming up in my mind. How long does a person have to be dead for a dog to make a hit so to speak? How long would Lisa have had to lay on the floor, "carpet or no carpet" and leave an odor or fluid indicating a cadaver? jmo

 

[cindysue]

...
we know that the stray cat was supposedly in the bedroom that night, the hit was in the bedroom in around the same place is it possible that stray had been in trash heap ..garbage dump ..something that could have been on that cats fur that would transferr the scent on that rug ..thus making the dogs hit there ...just a crazy theory and i have no idea if this is even a possiblity ..but it seems connnected to me..

 

[Oriah]

At what point in "death" does a body emit "decomposition?" This is what keeps coming up in my mind. How long does a person have to be dead for a dog to make a hit so to speak? How long would Lisa have had to lay on the floor, "carpet or no carpet" and leave an odor or fluid indicating a cadaver? jmo

We have been over this a bunch.
There are a lot of variables.
*sigh*