Cadaver dog hit on scent in DBs bedroom

[Oriah]

It's also important to note that I think the vast majority of "cadaver dogs" you read about and hear about out there have been trained to find just that, a body. They are looking for that body in the woods, a shallow grave, etc. They may not have had the in depth training that brings them into the HRD field, let alone into a more forensic world. When a dog/handler is looking for a body, then hits on other bodily fluids really aren't going to matter to them because they can obviously look and say "nope, no body here" keep moving. It's a much faster training process, though very limited in the scope of what they can do.

Thanks for answering all of these questions, sarx.

I'd like to add another thought that might help people understand the training and work of certain HRD dogs...

Caution graphic:
If HRD dogs are being used at, for example, a disaster site- they should be trained to alert on minute amounts of human decomp. A tiny piece of human tissue (of any sort, including blood) may be the only thing remaining of a person at a disaster site. But it is often enough to identify the deceased individual using forensics. Blood works as well, if retained on certain substrates or other materials.

That is essentially the explanation behind scent discrimination. If the dogs used in Lisa's case were trained in scent discrimination to this degree, then (in my very humble opinion) it is unlikely they were alerting to vomit, fecal matter, a used sanitary product, etc.

I kind of hope they're not as well trained as I think they are.

 

[sarx]

Nope, I can not say that and nobody should be making those claims, cuz it's just not possible.

I will say that we don't even know what specific training this dog has had. It may not hit on blood at all of any sort (yes, there are dogs out there that have been trained that way for contamination purposes). The FBI have some absolutely amazing dogs at their disposal that do things even I have a hard time wrapping my head around.

There are dogs that have success rates in the 90's, but nothing is 100%.

The FBI knows to confirm and back up, just because we haven't heard about it means nothing more than they are working hard at case integrity. Most every high profile case I've worked on I can say for a fact that the public knew about 5% of what was going on.

I guess for me personally I'm not sure why everything is hinging on this? It's just one piece of the puzzle, just like someone seeing a shoe print outside a window, or a shirt with blood on it. All could be nothing, but they could be something, kwim?

 

[mck16]

Nope, I can not say that and nobody should be making those claims, cuz it's just not possible.

I will say that we don't even know what specific training this dog has had. It may not hit on blood at all of any sort (yes, there are dogs out there that have been trained that way for contamination purposes). The FBI have some absolutely amazing dogs at their disposal that do things even I have a hard time wrapping my head around.There are dogs that have success rates in the 90's, but nothing is 100%.

The FBI knows to confirm and back up, just because we haven't heard about it means nothing more than they are working hard at case integrity. Most every high profile case I've worked on I can say for a fact that the public knew about 5% of what was going on.

I guess for me personally I'm not sure why everything is hinging on this? It's just one piece of the puzzle, just like someone seeing a shoe print outside a window, or a shirt with blood on it. All could be nothing, but they could be something, kwim?

I remember that one day they were bringing in the dogs and they made the helicopters leave the area because they did not want them to film what they were doing. Do you think this was the case (bolded above) in this search. They were doing something new or do you think they were just hiding the location of the search to prevent more speculation. I thought it very strange at the time. tia

 

[Abby Normal]

Sarx, I agree regarding Why everything has to hinge on this. Actually, that is precisely my point!! We can't decide anything based on that alone. It certainly IS damning, but you can't hang the case on it.

ContrRy to what it seems, I am not making a case for innocence, I'm simply saying we can't make black and white assumptions without hearing the rest of the case. There is so much we don't know, you know?

 

[natsound]

Nope, I can not say that and nobody should be making those claims, cuz it's just not possible.

I will say that we don't even know what specific training this dog has had. It may not hit on blood at all of any sort (yes, there are dogs out there that have been trained that way for contamination purposes). The FBI have some absolutely amazing dogs at their disposal that do things even I have a hard time wrapping my head around.

There are dogs that have success rates in the 90's, but nothing is 100%.

The FBI knows to confirm and back up, just because we haven't heard about it means nothing more than they are working hard at case integrity. Most every high profile case I've worked on I can say for a fact that the public knew about 5% of what was going on.

I guess for me personally I'm not sure why everything is hinging on this? It's just one piece of the puzzle, just like someone seeing a shoe print outside a window, or a shirt with blood on it. All could be nothing, but they could be something, kwim?

Sarx and Oriah, is there a contradiction here?

Sarx: "I guess for me personally I'm not sure why everything is hinging on this? It's just one piece of the puzzle... All could be nothing, but they could be something..."

Oriah: "I kind of hope they're not as well trained as I think they are."

I'm of the opinion that the dog hit is very significant... it goes a long way in helping police form a guess as to what happened to the missing baby. Is that right or wrong?

 

[natsound]

Sarx, I agree regarding Why everything has to hinge on this. Actually, that is precisely my point!! We can't decide anything based on that alone. It certainly IS damning, but you can't hang the case on it.

ContrRy to what it seems, I am not making a case for innocence, I'm simply saying we can't make black and white assumptions without hearing the rest of the case. There is so much we don't know, you know?

bbm

I haven't seen any poster make a black and white assumption, but some of us are putting our money on it, as I stated before.

 

[Oriah]

Sarx and Oriah, is there a contradiction here?

Sarx: "I guess for me personally I'm not sure why everything is hinging on this? It's just one piece of the puzzle... All could be nothing, but they could be something..."

Oriah: "I kind of hope they're not as well trained as I think they are."

I'm of the opinion that the dog hit is very significant... it goes a long way in helping police form a guess as to what happened to the missing baby. Is that right or wrong?

The dog alert(s) are significant, imo. No contradiction at all.

I'm just hoping Lisa is alive- as I am pretty sure sarx is as well.

One can hope, even in the face of evidence.

 

[Karmaa]

A word of caution while researching.... Just because it's out there doesn't make it true. Like any topic, there is a lot of BAD information out there, A LOT. And just because you can find it in 3 separate places doesn't make it true either.

I posted this on another thread, but I think it merits bringing over here and pondering...


The hrd issue is another thread, but briefly semen and blood (non-menstrual) are "human remains" and decompose as such.

I need to hear 2nd hit and forensics of that "area" to be convinced.

So by that thought process then, would feces, urine, saliva, hair, nails, sweat, vomit and shedding sking all be "human remains"?

Like Abby, I have done a lot of research through my school's online research library - so what I know came from peer-reviewed scientific journals as well.

My understanding is that HRDs are trained using two components of protein hydrolysis in deceased humans - cadaverine and putrescine. Each of these substances is produced any time human (or porcine) tissue dies. Cadaverine however, is also produced in some amount by LIVE humans. It is found in urine, feces, semen, vomit, gangrenous tissue and is a component of bad breath. (Which absolutely puts a whole new spin on me saying "ugh - my mouth tastes like something crawled in and died" when I wake up sometimes!).

HRD are trained using real human (or porcine) cadaverine and putrescine and they do have the olfactory ability to sense these substances in small quantities, however they CAN NOT distinguish between C&P from urine or C&P from a dead body.

Now, my opinion: Since most of the time HRDs are looking for a body they have a good reputation and are very good at what they do. But, in a case like this, where they got "a hit" with no body, there is no way to tell what decaying material caused the hit, IF the hit was even real. So, since there is no body, statistically the odds that there ever WAS a body in that location go way down. It COULD be a false positive, or it COULD have been some other decaying material, which was left there at any time.

I know that there was a thread where people were claiming that nothing but a dead human could have caused a hit- that body fluids could not. I think a lot of people remember those posts and are convinced that there was a dead body in that room, but there is an awful lot of room for "a mistake" to have occurred. JMO

 

[Oriah]

I remember that one day they were bringing in the dogs and they made the helicopters leave the area because they did not want them to film what they were doing. Do you think this was the case (bolded above) in this search. They were doing something new or do you think they were just hiding the location of the search to prevent more speculation. I thought it very strange at the time. tia

It's actually not strange at all, in certain cases. Sometimes handlers request no fly zones- sometimes LE does- sometimes both. Sometimes it is because media is so aggrevating, sometimes it's because it interferes with investigative tools being used, and sometimes it's because they don't want something spit out on the evening news (reporters that likely don't have a clue what they are talking about.)

 

[natsound]

The dog alert(s) are significant, imo. No contradiction at all.

I'm just hoping Lisa is alive- as I am pretty sure sarx is as well.

One can hope, even in the face of evidence.

I am too.. I only used that sentence of yours, Oriah, because it suggested that if they are indeed well trained dogs, then they did hit on something we hope they didn't hit on. Gotcha.

 

[Oriah]

Like Abby, I have done a lot of research through my school's online research library - so what I know came from peer-reviewed scientific journals as well.

My understanding is that HRDs are trained using two components of protein hydrolysis in deceased humans - cadaverine and putrescine. Each of these substances is produced any time human (or porcine) tissue dies. Cadaverine however, is also produced in some amount by LIVE humans. It is found in urine, feces, semen, vomit, gangrenous tissue and is a component of bad breath. (Which absolutely puts a whole new spin on me saying "ugh - my mouth tastes like something crawled in and died" when I wake up sometimes!).

HRD are trained using real human (or porcine) cadaverine and putrescine and they do have the olfactory ability to sense these substances in small quantities, however they CAN NOT distinguish between C&P from urine or C&P from a dead body.

Now, my opinion: Since most of the time HRDs are looking for a body they have a good reputation and are very good at what they do. But, in a case like this, where they got "a hit" with no body, there is no way to tell what decaying material caused the hit, IF the hit was even real. So, since there is no body, statistically the odds that there ever WAS a body in that location go way down. It COULD be a false positive, or it COULD have been some other decaying material, which was left there at any time.

I know that there was a thread where people were claiming that nothing but a dead human could have caused a hit- that body fluids could not. I think a lot of people remember those posts and are convinced that there was a dead body in that room, but there is an awful lot of room for "a mistake" to have occurred. JMO

BBM:
NO. That's one of the first errors. HRD dogs (Human Remains Detection) dogs should be trained on human remains, and human remains ONLY.

Pigs are not human.

This is where scent training becomes a vital component in court.

Mvhoo, of course.

 

[natsound]

Oriah and sarx,

What's the difference between a cadaver dog and an HRD dog?

 

[sarx]

It's actually not strange at all, in certain cases. Sometimes handlers request no fly zones- sometimes LE does- sometimes both. Sometimes it is because media is so aggrevating, sometimes it's because it interferes with investigative tools being used, and sometimes it's because they don't want something spit out on the evening news (reporters that likely don't have a clue what they are talking about.)

Yeah, like when you take your dog out of the truck for a potty break and your dog is just enjoying being out and crittering and some chopper records it and reports on the evening news "dogs hit on area near road".....

 

[sarx]

BBM:
NO. That's one of the first errors. HRD dogs (Human Remains Detection) dogs should be trained on human remains, and human remains ONLY.

Pigs are not human.

This is where scent training becomes a vital component in court.

Mvhoo, of course.

How about chickens? :great:

 

[Oriah]

Oriah and sarx,

What's the difference between a cadaver dog and an HRD dog?

Old school terminology vs new school terminology.

A 'cadaver' dog implies an entire body. HRD implies scent discrimination used to identifiy any part or parts of human tissue degradation, including gases.

 

[sarx]

The dog hit(s) are absolutely significant as is the tape, and the blanket, and the fibers, and all of the other evidence they took out of the house, the woods, the cars, etc. All I mean is that it is just one of many things.

 

[sarx]

Old school terminolgy vs new school terminology.

A 'cadaver' dog implies an entire body. HRD implies scent discrimination used to identifiy any part or parts of human tissue degradation, including gases.

And I think there are still a lot out there training for just that, entire bodies, so it further complicates the issue.

 

[Oriah]

Yeah, like when you take your dog out of the truck for a potty break and your dog is just enjoying being out and crittering and some chopper records it and reports on the evening news "dogs hit on area near road".....

Why you gotta bring up Katrina, sarx? That's just mean.

 

[Oriah]

How about chickens? :great:

:floorlaugh:

 

[sarx]

Why you gotta bring up Katrina, sarx? That's just mean.

LMAO, oh yeah, forgot about that! I guess we could safely say that it's ummm, happened more than once...