I’ve posted this before, but I’ve done some more digging on the dog question. Why I think this is important is because it seems to be the linchpin for those who say “Parents did it.” However it is pretty obvious for somebody who is not hysterical that it is highly, highly unlikely, no evidence exists and is in fact almost certainly not physically possible. (I’ve walked PDL with a 2o kilo bag in my hands. It is pretty obvious there is zero chance Gerry could have hid the body without a car, there is also nowhere to hide it within walking distance and extensive searching WAS done in the immediate area.)
So the literature is a mostly consistent that dogs are great at detecting a body IF IT’S THERE. What does emerge from the literature is that in fact dogs are so good, the chance of FALSE POSITIVES is PRESENT in certain circumstances. It’s a bit like with DNA, where we have gotten so good at detecting it, minute trace amounts from who-knows where begin to be detected and throw investigations. (Eg, trace DNA of an unknown Hispanic male on Johnbenet Ramsey’s fresh pair of Made in Mexico undies).
I have already posited that dogs were probably not alerted to MM’s body but to her fluids, possible before she was dead. Putrescence and Cadaverine are compounds found not only on corpses but in “bad breath” i.e. saliva. Acetone is also heavily present when bodies decompose in oxygen environment. Well... acetone is also a compound in many cleaning products, including Portuguese. One of the dogs was alerted to the “cuddle cat” or the plush toy. Well... what do you think little kids do with plush toys... yeah they drool all over them. The toy was obviously not in the contact with MM’s corpse so here we have further proof of body fluids inducing false positive. (Same thing for Kate’s dress. Anybody who carries kids around will understand.)
Think this is idle speculation? Think again.
Cadaver dog expert guilty of faking evidence
“Cadaver dog handler caught fabricating evidence.” - I am not claiming that for Eddie and Keela’s handler fabricated anything BUT it is clear from the conviction that fluids from a LIVING human can be mistaken by dogs for a DEAD one.
I also believe (but this IS just a hunch) that dogs that were trained in the UK in a certain “smell palette” could get confused when in a brand new environment. I still remember my first time in Bangkok. One of the first things that hits you is the smell (not necessarily bad) just so different.
<modsnip: not an approved source>
Hopefully, if you are still in spite of all evidence to the contrary thinking the parents did this - here’s some reasonable doubt for you.