GUILTY GA - Lauren Giddings, 27, Macon, 26 June 2011 #11

[PlainJaneDoe]

Something seems a little "edgy" about this search to me ... not quite fitting what we had heard earlier...? Didn't someone post that the Giddings family had raised substantial funds through donations for further search efforts? Now they are being told they won't be needed to help with the search ... and can "stand at the gate" of the landfill while it happens? Hmmm, I can understand that LE would want to spare the family the search experience, and would want to protect any forensic info that might still be found -- and maybe family members wouldn't want to participate anyhow -- but the wording just sounds almost like there is a little edginess there. I wonder if the Giddings' efforts kind of "pushed" LE to do further searching at the landfill.

Also sounds like Lauren's dad isn't too hopeful about success at this search site?

Also -- not on the topic of the search, but in this article -- they are calling Lauren an "aspiring prosecutor". Thought her interests had leaned more to defense work.

Something we talked about regarding Lauren Spierer's case is that it can be really hazardous to search through the landfill - eg., chemicals, sharp objects, microorganisms. I think that someone on that thread posted that the searchers wear hazmat suits. I got the impression that it might just be unsafe for people to be too close while all that debris is being stirred around.

 

[bessie]

Something seems a little "edgy" about this search to me ... not quite fitting what we had heard earlier...? Didn't someone post that the Giddings family had raised substantial funds through donations for further search efforts? Now they are being told they won't be needed to help with the search ... and can "stand at the gate" of the landfill while it happens? Hmmm, I can understand that LE would want to spare the family the search experience, and would want to protect any forensic info that might still be found -- and maybe family members wouldn't want to participate anyhow -- but the wording just sounds almost like there is a little edginess there. I wonder if the Giddings' efforts kind of "pushed" LE to do further searching at the landfill.

Also sounds like Lauren's dad isn't too hopeful about success at this search site?

Also -- not on the topic of the search, but in this article -- they are calling Lauren an "aspiring prosecutor". Thought her interests had leaned more to defense work.

I didn't sense edginess, Backwoods, but if there is some it might be because Mr. G believes LE should've done a more thorough search the first time, and any resources he can come up with are best kept in reserve in case another search is necessary at a later date. He knows he has only one shot, and as he said, he'd like it to be a sure one (after all other options are exhausted).

The article says "authorities", possibly including FBI, have been working for about a month to put together this search. We know LG's family was seeking help at the same time. Obviously, funding the search has been the hold up, and the local government was reluctant to foot the bill. Suddenly, now it's a go without the money pledged to Mr. G. So something changed in the meantime.

I was curious about the cousin, JM, who was quoted as saying the landfill will supply equipment on a donated/volunteer basis. If he's the JM from Blue Ridge who ran for state senate last year, his business is real estate development and construction. He could have some influence with the landfill and other business owners/politicians, and might've been able to work out an arrangement. That's totally speculation on my part, but it's a likely scenario.

 

[Flossie JMO]

I think it most likely was a reward, if in fact that is a ball (or similar) in his mouth.

I am a bit bothered by that, because while you certainly want a SAR dog to find his or her work 'fun' (even under terrible circumstances) imvho, an active working dog should not require any sort of toy or food reward.

That should be left behind in training. When actively working a crime scene or disaster, etc...it's not always handy or possible to have your SAR dogs' favorite Kong in your pocket. Kwim? So to me that reduces the validity of an alert.

Of course that is MOO.

JMO I am not a k9 handler, however, rewards, whether food, play, praise, kong etc, is of utmost importance IMO. Do you mean the reward should be praise or play and not a toy or food? wasn't sure if I read this correctly. I saw a post about the type of alert earlier, a sit or down can be the passive alert depending on the dog and the training ime, much like the reward. JMO

I didn't read back, was this a SAR or cadaver dog? Thanks

 

[Backwoods]

JMO I am not a k9 handler, however, rewards, whether food, play, praise, kong etc, is of utmost importance IMO. Do you mean the reward should be praise or play and not a toy or food? wasn't sure if I read this correctly. I saw a post about the type of alert earlier, a sit or down can be the passive alert depending on the dog and the training ime, much like the reward. JMO

I didn't read back, was this a SAR or cadaver dog? Thanks

There were several dogs, Flossie JMO, but I believe the one pictured with an object in its mouth (in some pictures) is a cross-trained dog, with credentials for both SAR and HRD work.

 

[Flossie JMO]

There were several dogs, Flossie JMO, but I believe the one pictured with an object in its mouth (in some pictures) is a cross-trained dog, with credentials for both SAR and HRD work.

Thanks backwoods, I will have to go back. I know food reward is generally discouraged for obvious reasons, then again cross training can be problematic, single purpose seems to be preferred. JMO

 

[Oriah]

JMO I am not a k9 handler, however, rewards, whether food, play, praise, kong etc, is of utmost importance IMO. Do you mean the reward should be praise or play and not a toy or food? wasn't sure if I read this correctly. I saw a post about the type of alert earlier, a sit or down can be the passive alert depending on the dog and the training ime, much like the reward. JMO

I didn't read back, was this a SAR or cadaver dog? Thanks

BBM: Yes.
Of course, that is my opinion only and many trainers and handlers feel differently.

Rewards are fine in training- such as when someone is 'hiding' and a SAR dog 'finds' them. Not so much when working. Think of it this way- when you train a dog for trailing or tracking, the 'victim' often plays with them as reward when they are 'found', or has their favorite toy. But when tracking or training when working, the victim is likely not going to play OR have their favorite toy OR food. Sit or down can absolutely be an alert- but they need to hold until released by voice command (and the longer the hold the better, especially when working an HRD dog.) Cross-trained dogs should be able to discern the difference, and alert appropriately.
In any case, a quiet 'good dog' should suffice until released.

In addition, either type of dog should not receive a toy or food reward until released from the job, and the environment. For example- when released and put back in a kennel or vehicle, or removed from the scene to a play or rest area.

If a dog has alerted at a door when working, and then given a toy... how does the handler know the alert to be accurate and to reward the dog? Kwim?

Jmvho, of course.

 

[Flossie JMO]

BBM: Yes.
Of course, that is my opinion only and many trainers and handlers feel differently.

Rewards are fine in training- such as when someone is 'hiding' and a SAR dog 'finds' them. Not so much when working. Think of it this way- when you train a dog for trailing or tracking, the 'victim' often plays with them as reward when they are 'found', or has their favorite toy. But when tracking or training when working, the victim is likely not going to play OR have their favorite toy OR food. Sit or down can absolutely be an alert- but they need to hold until released by voice command (and the longer the hold the better, especially when working an HRD dog.) Cross-trained dogs should be able to discern the difference, and alert appropriately.
In any case, a quiet 'good dog' should suffice until released.

In addition, either type of dog should not receive a toy or food reward until released from the job, and the environment. For example- when released and put back in a kennel or vehicle, or removed from the scene to a play or rest area.

If a dog has alerted at a door when working, and then given a toy... how does the handler know the alert to be accurate and to reward the dog? Kwim?

Jmvho, of course.

Thanks, I misunderstood. I wouldn't expect the reward, whatever it may be, should come from the victim. There are deceased people, unconscious people and children, frightened, injured, in shock, afraid of dogs etc etc. The reward for the find comes from the handler, not the victim IMO. An example would be the ball/tug etc trained dog, alerts when he finds, and once the handler gets there, the handler gives the reward to the dog. A pat and good dog would work for some, not for all imo. Wise old handler told me reward is crucial, it's the hunt and the game, once it becomes work, you won't get the desired results. JMO For other non obvious work or "finds" obviously it's a much more difficult process to determine if it is a false alert and whether rewards are due is more challenging and handlers would need to work those scenarios out in advance. JMO The "reward" in the mouth appears to me to be given as the dog is being removed from the scene, not while working it. JMO

 

[Oriah]

Thanks, I misunderstood. I wouldn't expect the reward, whatever it may be, should come from the victim. There are deceased people, unconscious people and children, frightened, injured, in shock, afraid of dogs etc etc. The reward for the find comes from the handler, not the victim IMO. An example would be the ball/tug etc trained dog, alerts when he finds, and once the handler gets there, the handler gives the reward to the dog. A pat and good dog would work for some, not for all imo. Wise old handler told me reward is crucial, it's the hunt and the game, once it becomes work, you won't get the desired results. JMO For other non obvious work or "finds" obviously it's a much more difficult process to determine if it is a false alert and whether rewards are due is more challenging and handlers would need to work those scenarios out in advance. JMO The "reward" in the mouth appears to me to be given as the dog is being removed from the scene, not while working it. JMO

BBM: I agree.
I do have an issue with the physical reward while still on site (although the dog does appear to be on lead, so I would assume released by handler... but they are still on site. So it likely has been 'released'- but only partially, which I believe to be confusing for the dog.)

You can't prove an accurate HRD hit when rewarding with a toy or play or food, before you know the hit to be accurate. So it is all an impossibility to me, unless the dog was let inside the room, alerted again- and then remains were found.

But that's just me- so many trainers and handlers feel differently.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

BBM: I agree.
I do have an issue with the physical reward while still on site (although the dog does appear to be on lead, so I would assume released by handler... but they are still on site. So it likely has been 'released'- but only partially, which I believe to be confusing for the dog.)

You can't prove an accurate HRD hit when rewarding with a toy or play or food, before you know the hit to be accurate. So it is all an impossibility to me, unless the dog was let inside the room, alerted again- and then remains were found.

But that's just me- so many trainers and handlers feel differently.

Bbm, this is what my Mom's friend, the man trailing bloodhound handler, told me as well.

 

[PlainJaneDoe]

Thanks, I misunderstood. I wouldn't expect the reward, whatever it may be, should come from the victim. There are deceased people, unconscious people and children, frightened, injured, in shock, afraid of dogs etc etc. The reward for the find comes from the handler, not the victim IMO. An example would be the ball/tug etc trained dog, alerts when he finds, and once the handler gets there, the handler gives the reward to the dog. A pat and good dog would work for some, not for all imo. Wise old handler told me reward is crucial, it's the hunt and the game, once it becomes work, you won't get the desired results. JMO For other non obvious work or "finds" obviously it's a much more difficult process to determine if it is a false alert and whether rewards are due is more challenging and handlers would need to work those scenarios out in advance. JMO The "reward" in the mouth appears to me to be given as the dog is being removed from the scene, not while working it. JMO

Not specific to dogs, but just from a behavioralist standpoint - it's critical that you reinforce the animal for the correct behavior. Whatever you reward, that's what they are more likely to do in the future. So it's really crucial that you're reinforcing the desired behavior, and not something that just resembles the target behavior.

Sorry, Flossie...this was meant to be a response to your first post about rewards.

 

[Flossie JMO]

Not specific to dogs, but just from a behavioralist standpoint - it's critical that you reinforce the animal for the correct behavior. Whatever you reward, that's what they are more likely to do in the future. So it's really crucial that you're reinforcing the desired behavior, and not something that just resembles the target behavior.

Sorry, Flossie...this was meant to be a response to your first post about rewards.

Absolutely, I understand and do agree, as stated though, in some cases it's not known, that's the problematic part.

For rewards, it goes to why in general LE wants high drive ball obsessed dogs ime. Will work for ball, kong etc. Sometimes, often imo, too much dog for the average home can be superstars for LE

 

[Flossie JMO]

BBM: I agree.
I do have an issue with the physical reward while still on site (although the dog does appear to be on lead, so I would assume released by handler... but they are still on site. So it likely has been 'released'- but only partially, which I believe to be confusing for the dog.)

You can't prove an accurate HRD hit when rewarding with a toy or play or food, before you know the hit to be accurate. So it is all an impossibility to me, unless the dog was let inside the room, alerted again- and then remains were found.

But that's just me- so many trainers and handlers feel differently.

I understand what you're saying

On site is not something we can tell from the pics, and I guess we can all interpret it different ways. We also don't know if/how the hit was/wasn't determined to be accurate, or how the handler has chosen to deal with that possible scenario with that particular dog. JMO fwiw

 

[Flossie JMO]

I can't imagine the pain Lauren's family is experiencing, imagine watching LE search dumps/landfill for your murdered child's missing body parts.

 

[pearl]

Since this is a slow time for us on this forum, I'll ask this question. Does anyone suspect that SM may have come to the attention of Mercer's administration during his college career for some reason other than the famous mass email? I had been thinking at the time when SM's former roommate gave his interview that I thought it odd that a college professor would call a former roommate to give him the news of SM.

 

[SouthernKate]

Since this is a slow time for us on this forum, I'll ask this question. Does anyone suspect that SM may have come to the attention of Mercer's administration during his college career for some reason other than the famous mass email? I had been thinking at the time when SM's former roommate gave his interview that I thought it odd that a college professor would call a former roommate to give him the news of SM.

Well the mass email was during law school.... the roommate was undergrad. Perhaps something changed in the transition? Even TM (roommate) said McD's appearance seemed different from college days.

Perhaps he was always boastful (as TM stated) but something pushed him over the edge to actually put his thoughts into action.

 

[sarx]

I couldn't agree more Oriah.

It has been my experience that the best dogs do it for "the love of the hunt", whatever that hunt is. Sure they like a pat on the head and a kind word, but they are truly obsessed with "the game".

I had a big ole long thing written and then realized that this is not a dog thread, so I'll just leave it short.

As to the landfill search...
Yes, they are incredibly nasty and dangerous. Yes, EVERYONE should be in appropriate gear, and there should be NOBODY out there that has not been trained on how to work in a landfill environment. This is not a place for family, volunteers off the street, etc. It's not like rummaging through a dumpster (which is bad enough), there are a ton of dangers that go along with landfill searches. I really hate seeing dogs do them, they don't get the same gear we do. Sure they get washed down, but IMO, it's not enough.

 

[bessie]

Sarx, I wish you had posted the long message. Any information on search dogs you and Oriah can offer will be helpful down the road as the case progresses. After reading the material the two of you provided and some I found on my own, I think we will be hearing a lot more about them.

On a slightly different note, I wonder if dogs will be used in the landfill search this week.

 

[bessie]

Since this is a slow time for us on this forum, I'll ask this question. Does anyone suspect that SM may have come to the attention of Mercer's administration during his college career for some reason other than the famous mass email? I had been thinking at the time when SM's former roommate gave his interview that I thought it odd that a college professor would call a former roommate to give him the news of SM.

It's hard for me to imagine that McD could spend four years in college without attracting attention. Maybe he had asked the instructor the two questions mentioned by TM.

 

[GeorgiaSunshine]

I didn't sense edginess, Backwoods, but if there is some it might be because Mr. G believes LE should've done a more thorough search the first time, and any resources he can come up with are best kept in reserve in case another search is necessary at a later date. He knows he has only one shot, and as he said, he'd like it to be a sure one (after all other options are exhausted).

The article says "authorities", possibly including FBI, have been working for about a month to put together this search. We know LG's family was seeking help at the same time. Obviously, funding the search has been the hold up, and the local government was reluctant to foot the bill. Suddenly, now it's a go without the money pledged to Mr. G. So something changed in the meantime.

I was curious about the cousin, JM, who was quoted as saying the landfill will
supply equipment on a donated/volunteer basis. If he's the JM from Blue Ridge who ran for state senate last year, his business is real estate development and construction. He could have some influence with the landfill and other business owners/politicians, and might've been able to work out an arrangement. That's totally speculation on my part, but it's a likely scenario.

Thank you Bessie for writing these theories. Backwoods, I was the poster who wrote about what specifically the FBI said about the search. Quote: search was for family closure not evidence. Quote: family had raised all the monies. And I believe I talked to the woman from the FBI on 08-20. I am very surprised by the latest Macon.com article. Although Bessie, I appreciate your interpretation of the article. I also know I donated for funds collected just from family and friends for the search. I believe the person in FBI said they would not be using dogs, because it is so dangerous in landfill for them. I could be mistaken on that last part though.

 

[Knox]

Of the upcoming search, Giddings’ father, in a telephone interview from his Maryland home Friday, said, “I’ve tried to stand back from this a little bit. I don’t want to take a lead in this.”

One of the reasons, Bill Giddings said, is that if a credible tip ever emerges about where his daughter’s remains might be, “we may have to ask for a lot of help and a lot of volunteers.”
“I don’t mind looking for a needle in a haystack,” he added, “but I do want to find the right stack to look in.”

Bill Giddings said he isn’t sure of the scope of the upcoming landfill search or how long it may last.

“I guess the major point is, as far as I know, there’s no real evidence that she may be there. Other than just a hunch,” he said. “I certainly don’t mind them looking. I appreciate it. ... I wish them luck.”

Read more: http://www.macon.com/2011/09/10/169...xpected.html#storylink=misearch#ixzz1XkD1Kx00​

I think Lauren's Father is being wise. IF, Mcd ever confesses or a witness ever pops up with "I saw that guy, June 28th over by ...", Bill Giddings can use his resources to help search then.

If Golba's dog "hit" on one of the dumpsters at the law school, no one has ever said that. Instead, Golba talks about a hunch that McD used the dumpsters at the law school.
The Macon Telegraph source (prob LE) says none of the dogs hit on the dumpsters.

Who knows, Golba may be right in his hunch. I hope he is and wish the searchers luck today. To me this search is necessary, in that the possibility needs to be excluded. If the resources can be pulled together, more power to them!

“We strongly believe that it is highly probable that the remains that we are looking for would be in that commercial dumpster and would have ended up in a Wolf Creek Landfill,” says Golba.

http://www.newscentralga.com/news/l...th-Search-For-Giddings-Remains-126734213.html