GrainneDhu
Verified Expert
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2010
- Messages
- 5,159
- Reaction score
- 47
The children's scent would have been on the bikes, and when the dogs were directed to track the scent, they went to the bikes. That's all they did. Couldn't this also mean that the dogs simple located the items that belonged to the children? Since the dogs did not track in any direction away from the bikes, wouldn't that mean that there was no scent from the children leading in any direction away from the bikes?
How would we conclude that because the dogs identified the bikes that belonged to the children, the children were there ... especially given the fact that the dogs stopped dead in their tracks at the bikes?
I wasn't there and even if I had been there, I wouldn't know. Depending on the dog, I might be able to make an educated guess but only the handler knows.
According to the reports I read, though, the dogs didn't stop at the bikes. They kept on going. What that means, only the handler knows for sure. As I recall, Aunt TB said the dogs went into the woods; Sandy Breault of the FBI said the dogs went towards the water.
Neither account suggests to me that the dogs stopped dead. I would be really, really surprised if the dogs did stop dead, without doing any casting around at all for more scent.