Dogs

[coastal]

these dogs may have set a new world record. tracing her to the same general area her remains would be found 6 months later (and over a year after she vanished) is

a m a z i n g

Also, I just heard on the news (will bring a link) that the dogs tracked Amber's scent to the Pala Library, and more specifically, to a video of "Friday the 13th", which was Amber's favorite movie, and to a book about wolves.

WTH?! I wonder if the bad guy lured her with those items? The news report said that the searchers asked the librarian if Amber had checked out those items, but the librarian said "no".

>>>snip

Gardner was registered as a sex offender because of his 2000 conviction for molesting a girl after luring her to his house with the Robin Williams movie "Patch Adams," about a doctor who uses humor to treat patients.

<<<snip

Source: Why Gardner Eluded Suspicion | NBC San Diego
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local-beat/John-Gardner-Charmed-Some-.html

 

[jjenny]

Also, I just heard on the news (will bring a link) that the dogs tracked Amber's scent to the Pala Library, and more specifically, to a video of "Friday the 13th", which was Amber's favorite movie, and to a book about wolves.

WTH?! I wonder if the bad guy lured her with those items? The news report said that the searchers asked the librarian if Amber had checked out those items, but the librarian said "no".

>>>snip

Gardner was registered as a sex offender because of his 2000 conviction for molesting a girl after luring her to his house with the Robin Williams movie "Patch Adams," about a doctor who uses humor to treat patients.

<<<snip

Source: Why Gardner Eluded Suspicion | NBC San Diego
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local-beat/John-Gardner-Charmed-Some-.html

Gardner taking a girl to a public library? I find that extremely far-fetched. People would have noticed the two of them in the library. It's one thing to lure a girl to his home. Quite the other to the public library full of other people.

 

[Ghostwheel]

Why in the world would anyone in their right mind take a kidnap victim to the library? Where other people could have seen them together? And even assuming she went with whoever it is voluntarily (which I find highly unlikely, as she reportedly never missed school), people would have still seen them together so why didn't anyone report anything about seeing them in the library?

Who said they went in? He could have stopped outside to drop something in the trash can. There are so many possible theories as to how it COULD have happened. She could have possibly been alive and restrained. Besides, can you tell me who you saw at the library last time you went? Not if they were happy and you didn't know them. They'd have been just some people.

And as an aside, why would anyone in their right mind kidnap and/or kill someone? After all, they found Shasta Groene in Denny's with her kidnapper. Just sayin'....

 

[jjenny]

Who said they went in? There are so many possible theories as to how it COULD have happened. She could have possibly been alive and restrained.

And as an aside, why would anyone in their right mind kidnap and/or killed someone? After all they found Shasta Groene in Denny's with her kidnapper. Just sayin'....

That's off topic, but I believe Duncan went there so they could be found. He certainly would have realized that going to a public place, with Shasta, would get him noticed.
Whoever the guy is who killed Amber, he certainly doesn't appear to have any desire to be found.
And if they didn't go in, then what is the point of dogs supposedly tracking her to the library?

 

[sarx]

All evidence from the dog in the Laci case was thrown out with the exception of what Trimble did at the Marina. Trimble went all over and in circles, to a winery and lost it so many times that it was not found to be credible. It sounds good on the news at first blush, but if you know the case it was a blunder and a hard hit for the credibility for trailing dogs.

As for the oldest successful trail, it was Norman Wilson with his bloodhounds that found the bodies of the missing hikers some 13 days later. There are many places to find his name. I personally have it cited in a number of books I own.

Yes, dogs are trained for different scents, this is a very important point. Bombs don't lose their scent, that is why they can be found decades later. Drugs keep their scent for years as well, hence why they can find drugs that haven't been touched for years. It takes years for decomposition to happen, again, why a cadaver dog can find a body that's been missing for years and years.
Now, here is where it changes. Area search dogs are air scenting and picking up "the cone" of traces of human scent. This disappears very fast and they will have no success if the person isn't there as there is nothing for them to smell.
Trailing dogs are scent specific looking for a particular person and are following tiny particles of human tissue and skin cells. These tiny skin cells (think micro dander) only have a limited shelf life. Also important is that sun and heat are the enemy and will greatly shorten the life of the trail.

 

[Ghostwheel]

...
And if they didn't go in, then what is the point of dogs supposedly tracking her to the library?

Depends. If they tracked her to the library area, it would indicate the area she was in. If they actually tracked her to a movie and book (first I heard of that, so I don't know how accurate it is), it would indicate she went that far alive and possibly willingly.

Mind you, I'm not sure I believe all this, just saying that:
If there is a report from August 2009 that states that these two dogs tracked Amber's scent to the Pala Library, and now her remains are found in the Pala area, less than 5 miles away, that is too weird to be a coincidence. Either the dogs really did some tracking, there was other information that lead the dog handlers to bring the dogs to Pala, the handlers are making up that they tracked to Pala (as in: it was never mentioned until now) or somebody found out the dogs tracked her to Pala, and moved the body to the area. If anyone else has some other reasons why this would not be a coincidence, I'd like some suggestions, because I do not believe:
Dogs just happen to track to the same area where a body is found.
Hikers happen upon a body that has been missing for a year when it has just come back into the public eye.

I just don't. But I'm willing to be convinced, if someone has a good reason.

 

[jjenny]

All evidence from the dog in the Laci case was thrown out with the exception of what Trimble did at the Marina. Trimble went all over and in circles, to a winery and lost it so many times that it was not found to be credible. It sounds good on the news at first blush, but if you know the case it was a blunder and a hard hit for the credibility for trailing dogs.

As for the oldest successful trail, it was Norman Wilson with his bloodhounds that found the bodies of the missing hikers some 13 days later. There are many places to find his name. I personally have it cited in a number of books I own.

Yes, dogs are trained for different scents, this is a very important point. Bombs don't lose their scent, that is why they can be found decades later. Drugs keep their scent for years as well, hence why they can find drugs that haven't been touched for years. It takes years for decomposition to happen, again, why a cadaver dog can find a body that's been missing for years and years.
Now, here is where it changes. Area search dogs are air scenting and picking up "the cone" of traces of human scent. This disappears very fast and they will have no success if the person isn't there as there is nothing for them to smell.
Trailing dogs are scent specific looking for a particular person and are following tiny particles of human tissue and skin cells. These tiny skin cells (think micro dander) only have a limited shelf life. Also important is that sun and heat are the enemy and will greatly shorten the life of the trail.

Especially if a car is used to either transport the body or the live girl, as it presumably was. I am not exactly convinced as to whether the dogs would really be able to do what they are said to have done.

 

[sarx]

Jjenny,
There is no certification for car trailing, because it hasn't been found to be reliable. It's been done in desperate times on fresh cases with so so results, the older the case the more dismal the results. Think about it, you are searching skin cells. When they are coming off the person on a trail they are free falling and plentiful. Now when you get in a car, you are not being hit by the air the same way and they have to get out of the vehicle (I'm betting she wasn't hanging her window out to aid in the scent distribution). The trail gets much weaker, and that would be a fresh trail. Now take that same weak trail and add 6 months to it and weather and such... We tried car trailing for Christina Williams a week after her abduction. Both dogs were able to get on the freeway with a direction of travel, one made it onto the exit where her body would later be found, but none of them could pick it up past the offramp, and that was only a week old. It's just not a good situation once they get in a car.

 

[jjenny]

Jjenny,
There is no certification for car trailing, because it hasn't been found to be reliable. It's been done in desperate times on fresh cases with so so results, the older the case the more dismal the results. Think about it, you are searching skin cells. When they are coming off the person on a trail they are free falling and plentiful. Now when you get in a car, you are not being hit by the air the same way and they have to get out of the vehicle (I'm betting she wasn't hanging her window out to aid in the scent distribution). The trail gets much weaker, and that would be a fresh trail. Now take that same weak trail and add 6 months to it and weather and such... We tried car trailing for Christina Williams a week after her abduction. Both dogs were able to get on the freeway with a direction of travel, one made it onto the exit where her body would later be found, but none of them could pick it up past the offramp, and that was only a week old. It's just not a good situation once they get in a car.

I am with you. If these dogs did what they are alleged to have done-those would have to be some super dogs, would you agree? As far as I understand it, we are talking about supposedly following a girl (or a body) to a location far away from where she went missing, and quite some time after it happened. And presumably the girl (or the body) didn't walk there. So the dogs would be presumably trailing a car quite a time later after the girl went missing.

 

[Nancy2441]

I'm not sure I would believe anything Michelle Bart has to say.

This time should be about Amber and her family not about Michelle Bart.

That's not to say the Escondido PD didn't make mistakes in this case. I just don't think Michelle Bart should be the one to point that out.

 

[sarx]

Agreed. I am a big proponent of dogs in SAR work (and other fields as well), it is amazing the things they can do, but I also know their limitations.

 

[JustToSeeYouSmile]

All evidence from the dog in the Laci case was thrown out with the exception of what Trimble did at the Marina. Trimble went all over and in circles, to a winery and lost it so many times that it was not found to be credible. It sounds good on the news at first blush, but if you know the case it was a blunder and a hard hit for the credibility for trailing dogs.

As for the oldest successful trail, it was Norman Wilson with his bloodhounds that found the bodies of the missing hikers some 13 days later. There are many places to find his name. I personally have it cited in a number of books I own.

Yes, dogs are trained for different scents, this is a very important point. Bombs don't lose their scent, that is why they can be found decades later. Drugs keep their scent for years as well, hence why they can find drugs that haven't been touched for years. It takes years for decomposition to happen, again, why a cadaver dog can find a body that's been missing for years and years.
Now, here is where it changes. Area search dogs are air scenting and picking up "the cone" of traces of human scent. This disappears very fast and they will have no success if the person isn't there as there is nothing for them to smell.
Trailing dogs are scent specific looking for a particular person and are following tiny particles of human tissue and skin cells. These tiny skin cells (think micro dander) only have a limited shelf life. Also important is that sun and heat are the enemy and will greatly shorten the life of the trail.

Understand all of the above. Wondering however if there were different dogs used for different purposes. Did I miss a link to what type of dogs were used and for what purpose? Because the reporting seems inaccurate. And I would hate for people in need to think that dogs are useless..... A narc dog is awesome for a narc situation. But sometimes, the narc hit you expected your dog to hit on, turns out to need an HRD dog, or a trailer. KWIM?

 

[JustToSeeYouSmile]

Jjenny,
There is no certification for car trailing, because it hasn't been found to be reliable. It's been done in desperate times on fresh cases with so so results, the older the case the more dismal the results. Think about it, you are searching skin cells. When they are coming off the person on a trail they are free falling and plentiful. Now when you get in a car, you are not being hit by the air the same way and they have to get out of the vehicle (I'm betting she wasn't hanging her window out to aid in the scent distribution). The trail gets much weaker, and that would be a fresh trail. Now take that same weak trail and add 6 months to it and weather and such... We tried car trailing for Christina Williams a week after her abduction. Both dogs were able to get on the freeway with a direction of travel, one made it onto the exit where her body would later be found, but none of them could pick it up past the offramp, and that was only a week old. It's just not a good situation once they get in a car.

There is no certification for "car trailing." And the "cone" for mantrailing is definately somewhat small. But if you have working dogs, you know that if you accidentally hit something in the road, or run over a dead animal or something in the road, or one dog happens to pee on a tire- they will sniff tires like crazy. They can be trained to recognize scent from tires and to disinguish the scent from the type of tire.

 

[Voice4theSilent]

Depends. If they tracked her to the library area, it would indicate the area she was in. If they actually tracked her to a movie and book (first I heard of that, so I don't know how accurate it is), it would indicate she went that far alive and possibly willingly.

Mind you, I'm not sure I believe all this, just saying that:
If there is a report from August 2009 that states that these two dogs tracked Amber's scent to the Pala Library, and now her remains are found in the Pala area, less than 5 miles away, that is too weird to be a coincidence. Either the dogs really did some tracking, there was other information that lead the dog handlers to bring the dogs to Pala, the handlers are making up that they tracked to Pala (as in: it was never mentioned until now) or somebody found out the dogs tracked her to Pala, and moved the body to the area. If anyone else has some other reasons why this would not be a coincidence, I'd like some suggestions, because I do not believe:
Dogs just happen to track to the same area where a body is found.
Hikers happen upon a body that has been missing for a year when it has just come back into the public eye.

I just don't. But I'm willing to be convinced, if someone has a good reason.

I completely agree with you. If there was indeed a report indicating the dogs tracked Amber to Pala (regardless of where!) and that report was dated any time before "the tip" came in leading LE to Amber's remains then there are a very limited number of scenarios here to argue.

 

[sarx]

Absolutely different dogs are used for different purposes, a Narc dog won't find a bomb, or a person (unless it's been cross trained). Dogs are probably the single most useful tool in SAR work. There are some dogs that are cross trained for multiple disciplines, but most are specialist as they do a particular job best. The first dogs to be called out are the trailing and area search dogs, cadaver dogs will be called in when the search turns to or is believed to be a recovery mission.

Did that help?

 

[JustToSeeYouSmile]

I completely agree with you. If there was indeed a report indicating the dogs tracked Amber to Pala (regardless of where!) and that report was dated any time before "the tip" came in leading LE to Amber's remains then there are a very limited number of scenarios here to argue.

But the dogs would have to have been HAD to have been taken to a certain spot and put on a certain task. Am I completely misunderstanding?

 

[Tink56]

This time should be about Amber and her family not about Michelle Bart.

That's not to say the Escondido PD didn't make mistakes in this case. I just don't think Michelle Bart should be the one to point that out.

I'm not familiar with Michelle Bart. Can you point me in a direction to read about her past case involvement or shall I just "goggle"?

 

[sarx]

I went back onto another forum and read some of the info from last year on the dates when the dogs came in.
Quoted from http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2009/aug/19/bn19amber-dubois-dog-missing/
"On Wednesday, the dogs will be searching in areas Platt
declined to specify and will have a dual purpose - to confirm whether
Amber was actually at any of the places she may have been sighted and
to develop new leads."

It is possible that there were leads that lead them to Pala that they were trying to use the dog to follow up on. No information is revealed about what the dogs found at that time (August 2009).

I suppose another theory is that she did in fact go off voluntarily with the tall skinny dark haired subject she was seen with by the school. She could have ended up in Pala with him on her own and then things went wrong.

 

[Wise Old Owl]

I'm not familiar with Michelle Bart. Can you point me in a direction to read about her past case involvement or shall I just "goggle"?

It seems Ms. Bart "inserted" herself - feet-first - right into the Caylee / Casey Anthony case. And a "fun time" was had by all - NOT!!!

I can't imagine doing what, I guess, this woman does for a living. "What do you do for a living?"

"Well, I go around the country and act as a spokesperson for family's who have lost or are missing a child!"

huh?

 

[sarx]

But the dogs would have to have been HAD to have been taken to a certain spot and put on a certain task. Am I completely misunderstanding?

Are you referring to them ending up in Pala specifically?

Trailing dogs (which these were ) are given a "scent article" (an uncontaminated item of the missing person, piece of clothing, hairbrush, etc) and from that they follow that person's trail of sloughed off skin cells. They will ignore all other people and follow it as long as they can. (next is theoretical only for explaining) In Amber's case if they started from the school they would have headed out of that area, onto the freeway. Because they can't shut the freeway down they would have done exit hopping, getting off at each offramp and letting the dog try and find the scent again. In theory the dogs would have told the handlers that Pala was the place to get off and then once on more rural roads they would have followed the trail again all the way in to the library)