Sleuthing Madeleine's disappearance.

[Clutchbag]

From Martin Grimes profile

"Blood that is subjected to dilution by precipitation or other substantial water source prior to drying will soak into the ground or other absorbent material. This may dilute the scent to an unacceptable level for accurate location.It is possible however that the EVRD will locate the scent source as it would for 'dead body' scent."

Brit I haven't seen anything that says that Eddie alerts to bodily fluids. I think it's only Keela.

Want your opinion on the above as i'm not great at putting into words the DNA stuff.

TIA

i think this means eddie was a very clever dog

 

[SapphireSteel]

i think this means eddie was a very clever dog

They are amazing animals.

They can tell the difference between many different scents, which is why they can be used to find many different people, both dead and alive.

The dogs "see" scent as you or I would see colour. This means that they can "see" even faded scent, or miniscule amounts...the same as you or I would be able to see an orange golf ball on a green.

They are never mistaken. They never think orange is purple, blue, red, yellow.

They never mistake cadaverine (if they are trained for it) with blood.

The reason so few dogs are trained for cadaverine is that they instinctively shy away from it. They need special training to override this natural response to decomposition...training which costs a lot of money and time and is very specialised.

Anyway you can read more about it on the cadaver thread, but essentially this insistence on rubbishing the dogs is really insane. Apparently there is one poster in all the world who knows they are rubbish, hellbent on a crusade to convince the rest of us (or maybe just themselves).

It's not going to work. Dogs don't lie.

:cow:

 

[brit1981]

sapphire, you have explained what you think is the difference between cadaverine and bodily remains, but I am sorry to say you are wrong and misunderstood the quotes you put up to support your ideas. I really do not mean to be rude, but you are incorrect.

The fact is according to grime, and the jersey report the dog alerts to bodily fluids from living people (this was actually highlighted in the jersey report). An entire body is not needed for decomposure to occur. Once a human tissue becomes detached from its oxygen supply it will die and the dog will pick it up. I know you talked about digestive enzymes, but do you realise that does not mean enzymes from the digestive system. The digestive system does not need to be present for decomposure to occurr. Can I just ask - is that what you think, that digetsive enzymes involve din decomposition have to come from the digestive system, and that the digetsive system is needed for decomposure?

And dogs do not shy away from decomposing tissue be it human or animal. they are gross like that.

 

[Clutchbag]

Dried blood yes, all dogs will do this. Bodily fluids -no. You keep repeating this like a broken record. It does not make it true

absolutely, and no link has ever been provided to prove the assertion that mr grimes cadaver dog alerts to bodily fluids from living people or that mr grime ever said that, only misrepresentations, ergo the argument is pretty null and void, if cadaver dogs alerted to live peoples snot semen toenails body odour etc they would be pretty useless as cadaver dogs as they woukdbebarking left right and centre, simple logic, and we know eddie did not bark anywhere at all that was unconnected to the mccanns, another nail in the coffin for the argument

 

[SapphireSteel]

Directly from the Final PJ report -

One of the dogs is trained to detect cadaver odor and the other to detect vestiges of human blood, with existing knowledge that their prior usage had resulted in significant results, principally in the detection of vestiges, which had then been, later, confirmed in the laboratory.

After a positive joint meeting with the British police, it was decided to use this capability and a large number of objects and locations were examined, with these diligences being recorded in films which are included in the documentation (appendix III).

In some of these locations and objects, the animals exhibited the behaviour of identification and "signaling", including:

pages 37 and 38

1 - Apartment 5A, of the resort 'Ocean Club', place from where the child disappeared.

- cadaver odour dog:
*in the couple’s bedroom, in a corner, close to the wardrobe;
*in the living room, behind the sofa, close to the lateral window of the apartment;

- blood dog:
* in the living room, behind the sofa, close to the lateral window of the apartment (exactly as it was signalled by the cadaver odour dog);

2 – Area of the backyard, close to the apartment 5A:

- cadaver odour dog:
* in a flowerbed, commented by the dog handler the lightness of the scent detected;

3 – Apartments where the rest of the elements of the group stayed

* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs;

4 – House of the MCCANNs at the date of the inspection

* NOTHING at the house, was detected by any of the dogs;

5 - In the area of Vila da Luz

* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs;

6 – In the clothes and belongings of the Family MCCANN

- cadaver odour dog:
* in two pieces of clothing belonging to KATE HEALY
* in a piece of clothing of the minor MADELEINE
* in the plush toy, possibly belonging to MADELEINE (it was detected cadaver odour, when the plush was inside the residence – at the date occupied by the family)

7 – In the vehicle used by the MCCANN family


- cadaver odour dog:
* signalled the key of the vehicle;

- blood dog:
* signalled the key of the vehicle;
* signalled the interior of the vehicle’s boot;

8 – In the vehicle used by a friend of the family, who stayed in the same resort, matching some of the holiday days.

pages 39 and 40

* NOTHING was detected by either dog;

9. In all the vehicles that were used by arguido ROBERT MURAT and persons that are close to him;

* NOTHING was detected by either dog.

(in a total of ten vehicles, the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour dog only signaled the vehicle that belonged to the MCCANN family, which was rented on the 27th of May)

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id136.html

Pretty compelling reading. It confirms the abilities and duties of the dogs, the involvement of the British Police, and of course the results which are startling...but then of course the dogs are "rubbish" aren't they?

:banghead:

 

[brit1981]

Once again sapphire, do you think that decomposure only happens if an entire body is present, and when you see the phrase digestive enzymes do you think that means the digestive system has to be present?

And the dogs do alert to bodily fluids this is confirmed by the jersey reports, and grimes and harrisons reports which I have linked to several times. But if people have evidence of othewise then I suggest they contact operation grange with this as it is new evidence in a missing child case and should be reported to the police rather than just a forum.

 

[Clutchbag]

Dried blood yes, all dogs will do this. Bodily fluids -no. You keep repeating this like a broken record. It does not make it true

Bump

This is the crux of the matter forgetting dried blood for a second,, if the cadaver dog alledgedly alerts to bodily fluids from live people, (and no where has this ever been stated by the handler as opposed to bodily fluids from dead bodies) and that is the excuse used by some for all the cadaver dog alerts, then it is statistically astronomical that he would not alert anywhere else in all the places he was taken, nine other cars, another villa and garden, four other flats, roadways, beaches, derelict buildings, farmland......

Bump

Waiting for link that mr grime said eddie alerts to fluids from living people

 

[SapphireSteel]

Bump
Bump

Waiting for link that mr grime said eddie alerts to fluids from living people

Don't hold your breath.

But you know, Eddie may have been trained for both.

Eddie was an excellent scent dog. The good ones can be trained for several different scents.

What he wouldn't do, ever, is mistake one for the other.

Dogs "see" scent and different scents appear as different colours to them. They would no more confuse a live scent with a dead scent, than we would mistake red for blue.

Those who dismiss the abilities of the dogs as "rubbish" or "unreliable" (I'm looking at you, Gerry) really should take some time and learn how truly amazing they are. Then they may realise how stupid they sound when they try to discredit them.

I can assure you, if those other detractors ever had a little child close to them go missing, one of the first things they would ask the police is if they have dogs to help with the search.

:cow:

 

[Clutchbag]

i wont as mr grime never said such a thing, it gets tiresome to read words put in his mouth, and lets not forget he alledgedly said keela has made false alerts in the past, a link to which i am still waiting on for six months later, as well as the link to show as asserted that the british police didnt want to send mr grime a fellow officer at the time, experienced dog handler, out to portugal as it would be embarrassing for them

 

[K9Snoop]

The reason so few dogs are trained for cadaverine is that they instinctively shy away from it. They need special training to override this natural response to decomposition...training which costs a lot of money and time and is very specialised.

Dogs (as will most animals) will naturally gravitate toward dead stuff. A lot of finds are the result of a pet dog dragging home a human body part/bone. The only thing we "train" them for is to ignore other dead things and to tell us when they detect the odor of human decomp.
The only dead humans that animals appear to shy away from are humans who die due to drug/alcohol overdose or are heavy users of the same.

 

[Clutchbag]

:

Dogs (as will most animals) will naturally gravitate toward dead stuff. A lot of finds are the result of a pet dog dragging home a human body part/bone. The only thing we "train" them for is to ignore other dead things and to tell us when they detect the odor of human decomp.
The only dead humans that animals appear to shy away from are humans who die due to drug/alcohol overdose or are heavy users of the same.

thanks for that, puts paid to posters who say the cadaver dog alerted to a COconut LOL

 

[SapphireSteel]

:

thanks for that, puts paid to posters who say the cadaver dog alerted to a COconut LOL

You know it won't make one whit of difference to the spin.

ullhair:

 

[Clutchbag]

the spin has failed spectacularly, so much so, that some people have gone to the extreme length of suggesting that when the dog alerted in the parents bedroom near the wardrobe what he was actually alerting to was the tiny molecules of blood under the floor behind the sofa in the living room
:what:

 

[jgv]

Sapphire Steel, I really don't believe the parents were in anyway responsible JMHO of course and it's been a case I have followed since the beginning like a lot of you.

I do like reading the facts and hearing others points of view but it just doesn't change what I believe based on the way I have interpreted the facts just as you have interpreted them in a different way. Even facts can be subjective.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Sapphire Steel, I really don't believe the parents were in anyway responsible JMHO of course and it's been a case I have followed since the beginning like a lot of you.

I do like reading the facts and hearing others points of view but it just doesn't change what I believe based on the way I have interpreted the facts just as you have interpreted them in a different way. Even facts can be subjective.

I'm glad someone's reading my responses!

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and expressing it...but what is not acceptable are baseless allegations and statements. Unfortunately we have something of a problem here of some continually posting inaccuracies, and ignoring any replies or requests for links...they just mow on with the next lot of slander.

You could be forgiven for thinking that Goncalo Amaral was the abductor, for the amount of abuse he's received on these threads in recent weeks.

Anyway please feel free to post away! You will never be scolded for an opinion, just for posting that opinion as fact when it is not, or posting false allegations.

I don't know about facts being subjective, by the way...isn't that why they're called "facts"?

:waitasec:

 

[jgv]

I'm glad someone's reading my responses!

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and expressing it...but what is not acceptable are baseless allegations and statements. Unfortunately we have something of a problem here of some continually posting inaccuracies, and ignoring any replies or requests for links...they just mow on with the next lot of slander.

You could be forgiven for thinking that Goncalo Amaral was the abductor, for the amount of abuse he's received on these threads in recent weeks.

Anyway please feel free to post away! You will never be scolded for an opinion, just for posting that opinion as fact when it is not, or posting false allegations.

I don't know about facts being subjective, by the way...isn't that why they're called "facts"?

:waitasec:

A fact certainly shouldn't be subjective but in cases I like this I think even facts can be interpreted so many different ways. Which shouldn't be the case really but I think it points to things not being investigated thoroughly.

It's still good reading what everyone thinks though. I mean maybe if there was more of that from the beginning she would have been found. I think the police focused on the parents a little too much. But I always read any information on her case (we had a girl from our high school go missing never found and that's where my interest in missing people comes from).

But then maybe I feel that way because of other cases. Hope it's okay to go off topic...but for me being in Australia there are cases like Lindy Chamberlain where with the facts and common sense (and having spent time in the Northern Territory) I never believed she was guilty and I was young then too. For cases like Keisha Abrahams something was definately off with the parents and timeslots just didn't fit right so I knew something was wrong based on the events and facts.

So I am always open to reading someone elses opinion. It's always interesting.

I just really hope they find Madeleine one day.

 

[SapphireSteel]

A fact certainly shouldn't be subjective but in cases I like this I think even facts can be interpreted so many different ways. Which shouldn't be the case really but I think it points to things not being investigated thoroughly.

It's still good reading what everyone thinks though. I mean maybe if there was more of that from the beginning she would have been found. I think the police focused on the parents a little too much. But I always read any information on her case (we had a girl from our high school go missing never found and that's where my interest in missing people comes from).

But then maybe I feel that way because of other cases. Hope it's okay to go off topic...but for me being in Australia there are cases like Lindy Chamberlain where with the facts and common sense (and having spent time in the Northern Territory) I never believed she was guilty and I was young then too. For cases like Keisha Abrahams something was definately off with the parents and timeslots just didn't fit right so I knew something was wrong based on the events and facts.

So I am always open to reading someone elses opinion. It's always interesting.

I just really hope they find Madeleine one day.

I'm in Australia too.

I've highlighted what you said about little Keisha's parents.

The Portugese police detected contradictions and inconsistencies from the Tapas 9 from the first hour. Their stories didn't "fit right" and they still don't.

The British Police were the ones who first "developed" the evidence implicating the McCanns.

The British Police supplied the cadaver dog, who found cadaverine on the McCanns belongings, alone amongst the entire resort.

Unlike Lindy, most of the details have been published many times on many forums so there isn't anything hidden.

We also know that the McCann has been very aggressive in trying to censor any opinion but their own.

Thankfully they have failed at this so now we have the facts as seen by the lead investigator, published in his own words.

I suggest you read "The Truth of the Lie" for his perspective. It is now freely available on the internet, as is the PJ's final report which states in black and white the inconsistencies and changing stories of the Tapas crew.

:cow:

 

[jgv]

I'm in Australia too.

I've highlighted what you said about little Keisha's parents.

The Portugese police detected contradictions and inconsistencies from the Tapas 9 from the first hour. Their stories didn't "fit right" and they still don't.

The British Police were the ones who first "developed" the evidence implicating the McCanns.

The British Police supplied the cadaver dog, who found cadaverine on the McCanns belongings, alone amongst the entire resort.

Unlike Lindy, most of the details have been published many times on many forums so there isn't anything hidden.

We also know that the McCann has been very aggressive in trying to censor any opinion but their own.

Thankfully they have failed at this so now we have the facts as seen by the lead investigator, published in his own words.

I suggest you read "The Truth of the Lie" for his perspective. It is now freely available on the internet, as is the PJ's final report which states in black and white the inconsistencies and changing stories of the Tapas crew.

:cow:

I do agree with you how the McCann's have handled their side of things.

The cadaver dog I knew about too. I just question the thoroughness of the police investigation. I feel like that is where some of the gaps have come from.

Will give "The Truth of the Lie" a read now.

 

[SapphireSteel]

So...

do you have any idea why the McCann detectives left Germany without questioning Raymond Hewlett even though he had agreed to speak to them?

:waitasec:

 

[gord]

So...

do you have any idea why the McCann detectives left Germany without questioning Raymond Hewlett even though he had agreed to speak to them?

:waitasec:

not sure who this is directed at but will answer

Hewlett was an evil manipulative man who has an awful record of abuse to children - he was also at the time dying of cancer

If you ask me why he refused to see the detectives - he was just playing his usual games - he knew the form when dealing with the police - when being questioned by police about Lesley Molseed murder ( who was 11 when snatched and murdered ) he knew enough to say no comment throughout the interview. Many ex detectives are open that they think he was responsible but got away ....any way past history now

so I think he changed is mind at the last minute when they actualy turned up. But at the end of the day who knows

For teh record I have no idea if Hewlett was indeed involved - but to try and portray him as an innocent victim who has been pursued by the mccanns living quietly with his kids is a bit off the mark.

He was certainly of interest to the PJ and SY and all I hope is that he was properly investigated at the time . If the only alibi was his wife then that would not be enough for me