sarx
Verified Expert/Professional in SAR and K9SAR
Yea, that's what has me wondering too. 3 1/2 miles isn't close (IMO), BUT the fact that they were reported to have trailed all the way down the I15 makes me wonder what they were following.
Yea, that's what has me wondering too. 3 1/2 miles isn't close (IMO), BUT the fact that they were reported to have trailed all the way down the I15 makes me wonder what they were following.
I'm thinking that would explain a lot of things. But there are a huge # of variables here. Family being one of them. I would really like to know the scent article used.
ETA: or perhaps the person who had her, did.
But, if we're talking the person who took her, then we would be talking his/her scent article that they were following. Being that they didn't know who took her back when they did the search (and as far as we know they still don't), that seems like an unlikely scenario.
The PI for the case said that they were also using the dogs to confirm leads. They may have had information on Pala. We don't know as they won't talk about it and probably never will hear about it.
Socal, can you point me to the FBI articles for me, I would like to read them. It's also interesting that they talked about it on the news last year. I could find nothing in print from the media or anywhere from last August talking about it. Quite the opposite in fact, they said they had found nothing significant but were asked by LE to keep what they did find quiet. If it was on the news last year it should also have been in print, let me know if you can track down something from August.
Recuemedic, can you point me to a map that shows the library only being .5 miles from the body site? I thought that the library was in town and not on that road.
Hey, I can't seem to get either of those links to work. I'm still trying to find where it says they tracked scent up Pala-Temecula Rd as the last hour I've spent searching only yields info about the library, when anything is mentioned specifically at all.
And I would have to disagree about disputing tracking her scent. They tracked something to Pala, what we have no idea, and there are a whole lot of variables that could make sense.
Here it is again: http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/escondido/article_7a7449b1-6a3d-5930-a68b-c0373e775ad1.html
It's an article from the North County Times dated March 8, 2010; author is Sarah Gordon. They said the dogs hit on numerous places approx 3 miles traveling north on PT Road
Interesting, that is the only article I've seen reporting this (of course, they got the breed of dog wrong in part). It's also the first I've heard of them going nuts in a residential area by the casino.
I am leery to put too much weight on a lone article, especially with so much different information than all the rest.
True, they did follow up, and they were not able to match any of the results.
There are lots of ways to explain it that don't actually involve them being on Amber's scent.
Here's another article:
http://www.examiner.com/x-18953-San...ily-lead-searchers-to-Pala-last-August-photos
Also, the media was following the dogs when the search was going on and they showed part of it on the news at the time. Maybe you could locate that??
Ok, so in this article the dog handler states
"According to Platts, Escondido police never talked to her about their findings."
If the police didn't talk to Platts (the dog handler), then how did they take FBI used dogs into the same area to try and confirm the findings?
I don't know at this point who is telling the truth.
my statistical inference is to state a scientific opinion about the probability of this being a false trail -its statisticallly impossible for it not to be on scent of some kind -not sparring just realize if we look at this like we do in medicine the outcome based information is what we look at _they were very close in thousnds of square miles _hitting the right haystack among thousands is a good job> yes imagery would have been the next step _with dog teams on cadaver mode>