Cadaver dog hit on scent in DBs bedroom

[Peazzzer]

This case has been such a fiasco, I just do not know what to think anymore. I believe the dog "hit" on baby Lisa's body, and I agree that the knowledge of the dogs hit will come out in court. However, that could occur when the Mad Hatter's tea party is ever over. Where IS Lisa?????

 

[Deleted member 39678]

In further research about dogs I found another interesting article by John Ensminger dated April 2, 2012 about a study conducted by Mary Cablk of the Desert Research Institute in Reno.

The researchers note that compared to drug and bomb dogs, scientific literature on human remains detection (HRD) dog capabilities is sparse. They note (citing Lorenzo et al. 2003), as they had earlier in the paper about finding human teeth, that the belief that HRD dogs can differentiate between human and animal remains “has yet to be tested in a rigorous experimental framework.”

http://doglawreporter.blogspot.com/2012/04/training-cadaver-dogs-on-pig-remains.html

 

[brit1981]

this contradicts the info grime talks about in the article i linked earlier... he mentions both a passive alert and a wildly barking alert in regard to eddie and there is video of eddie wildly barking at the beach during a training search.

do you have link to your source?

http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm

this is a quote from one of Grime's statements to the PJ (it is a question and answer type statement, I have highlighted the Pjs question in red)

'Based upon the dogs' behaviour, is it possible to distinguish between a strong signal and a weak signal'.

The dogs' passive CSI alert provides an indication as per their training and does not vary. They only give an alert when they are 'positive' that the target of the odour is present and immediately accessible. If they had any doubts they would not give an alert. EVRD gives an alert by means of a vocal bark. The variations in the vocal alert can be explained by many reasons such as 'thirst' or 'lack of air due to effort'. Every alert can be subject to interpretation, it has to be confirmed. The signals of an alert are only just that. Once the alert has been given by the dog, it is up to the investigator/forensic scientist to locate, identify and scientifically provide the evidence of DNA, etc.

So when Grime talks about a pasisve signel he is talking about the CSI dog (keela who alerts to blood only), when he talks about an active alert he is talkign about the EVRD (Eddie who alerts by barking to cadaver odour, bodily fluids including dried blood from a living person). So the dogs either alert or do not alert regardless of how much is present.

Can I also just say that soem of the storie sin your link are about the McCanns and the papers have admitted the stories were untrue (some had to make big front page apologies, and for example the story about Kate mccann claiming to have been nar six bodies is not something Kate is recorded as ever saying). This is not just something that has happened to the mccanns more recently newspapers have been prosecuted for contempt of court for writing untrue stories about someone questioned about a murder. If you want more details the leveson enquiry homepage is good.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Here's another article that shows the amazing abilites of HRD dogs while at the same time demonstrates that sometimes there are less than stellar results during a double blind test. This test used human teeth as the target.

The researchers concluded that the “dog teams were shown to be able to locate individual human teeth in a field environment.” The poor performance of Team C shows that “significant variability exists in dog teams, even among those that have met the same minimum criteria for certification, alert type, work style, and trained target odors.” Nevertheless, dogs can clearly be useful in finding teeth.

The more that I read about these dogs the more I feel that the human element is what causes false positives and other misdirections. JMO.

http://doglawreporter.blogspot.com/2011/06/some-cadaver-dogs-are-good-at-finding.html

 

[sarx]

Here's another article that shows the amazing abilites of HRD dogs while at the same time demonstrates that sometimes there are less than stellar results during a double blind test. This test used human teeth as the target.


The more that I read about these dogs the more I feel that the human element is what causes false positives and other misdirections. JMO.

http://doglawreporter.blogspot.com/2011/06/some-cadaver-dogs-are-good-at-finding.html

Honestly, one way or another you can generally bring it back around to the handler/trainer. Gotta back all the way up to training too. And yes, the human aspect of things plays a huge part. A dog is only as good as his/her handler, lol.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

This article by John Ensminger that discusses a study done by Mary Cablk of the Desert Research Institute of Reno is full of interesting information about HRD dogs so I decided to revisit it to further the discussion about the "FBI dog" hit in Lisa's home.

The study raises some questions that defense attorneys may be able to use in court. I do realize that there has been no arrest, but these questions also makes me think about what we can conclude with the "FBI dog" hit in this case.

As we noted in Police and Military Dogs, the work of cadaver dogs is relatively infrequently questioned in court because a cadaver is found and identified by DNA, dental comparison, or other procedures. The work of the dog becomes historical to the case, and does not receive more than a brief mention in a judicial opinion. Nevertheless, this study may have an impact on future prosecutions where a body has not been found and the dog’s alert is taken as proof that the suspected decedent was present at a location, or in cases where the body has been found and the prosecution’s problem is to establish that it was in the defendant’s car or house or at some other specific location (consider the recent Casey Anthony prosecution involving a car trunk). If the defense can make a plausible argument that a dead pig or other animal might have been at the location, and establish that the dog’s training aids included swine remains, a court may have to consider the implications of this research.

For some the "FBI dog" hit is proof that Lisa Irwin died in her home and that the most likely suspect is her mother. Without knowing more about the training the "FBI dog" received, well, I honestly have some questions as to what it really means. And if I add the possibility of scent transference or someone planting scent I have further questions about what the hit means.

I wouldn't mind buying John Ensminger's book "Police and Military Dogs" but the nearly $70 price is a bit steep for me.

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Police-Military-Dogs-Detection-Admissibility/dp/1439872392"]Police and Military Dogs: Criminal Detection,Forensic Evidence,and Judicial Admissibility: John Ensminger: 9781439872390: Amazon.com: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51x5xhuf-HL.@@AMEPARAM@@51x5xhuf-HL[/ame]

http://doglawreporter.blogspot.com/2012/04/training-cadaver-dogs-on-pig-remains.html

 

[Deleted member 39678]

This makes me wonder what is considered to be a "real cadaver material" trained dog. Here is a quote from some training material provided by Southwest Rescue Dogs Inc.

SRDI dogs train on real cadaver material. Alternative sources are available, such as
pseudoscent. Pig flesh is similar to human and is used as a training aid if you do not have access
to cadaver material. SRDI also uses soil from a burn area for training aids. A burn area is an
area of earth where a body has been decomposing. Fluids from the body have seeped into the
soil.

Apparently pseudoscent and pig flesh is close enough to use as a training aid if need be. But I don't see how they can claim that their dogs are trained on "real cadaver material" if they use these other training aids when necessary.

http://www.sarci.org/srdi/members/cadaver.pdf

 

[brit1981]

The below is from a report on the jersey care home case and what it says about the use of the dogs. (however we are talking about Grime and eddie the EVRD here, not Morse)

"THE USE OF SPECIALIST SEARCH DOGS
Unfortunately, there were a whole number of problems with this.
a) Firstly, the decision was made to use a private firm rather than similar
dogs from another police force and this will have been more expensive.
b) Secondly, the individual who was used was no longer fully accredited.
c) Thirdly, the specialist dog for searching for bodies was 7 months
beyond its police accreditation. It is now apparent that the dog was
giving false positives.
d) Fourthly, the second specialist dog became out of date for testing for
police accreditation after one month.
e) Fifthly, the sum of £92,705 was spent on the dog handler and dogs for
139 days of charged work and yet the dogs were only used for 35
days. A further 23 days of the work of the handler in other capacities
are accounted for but 81 days of work are not accounted for although
17 of these were for days upon which the dog handler was not going to
work (ie Sundays).
f) Sixthly, accommodation costs for the dog handler were £15,818 and he
stayed at an hotel at the wrong side of the Island. Furthermore, the dog
handler was wrongly granted an upgrade for his accommodation which
cost £1,613 extra"
Here is the link for the above http://www.gov.je/SiteCollectionDocu...714 ILeM.pdf

When talking about Eddie he says he used pig material during training. It is illegal to use human tissue in training in the UK so if Morse received any training in the UK he would have recieved it on non-human material. I think if prosecuters are going to use dog alerts where there is no body as evidence, then we can expect to see the dogs looked into a lot mjore and people pointing out inconsistencies in their previous alerts, training etc (it is all very well claiming a dog has never given a false positive, but if that means no bodiy was found and the missing person has not turne dup alive, or the dog alerted to dried blood or another bodily fluid it doe snot say much really)? We are talking about putting people in prison, or in some cases taking awya their life if they are given the death penalty, as well as stopping looking for other suspects so we have to be certain the dog alerts are 100% an indication a body was there.

Ranch,
Coudl you not order the book from your local library

 

[sarx]

Again, while not speaking specifically to this case or these handlers, certification is sooooo important. Everytime I hear about a dog (or dogs) going out to look for someone that isn't properly certified, it makes my blood boil.

 

[Oriah]

Me too.

I am glad for this discussion in Lisa's case because it is a reminder that handlers and their dogs often- literally- require translation services. In the "I say tomato, you say tomaato' sort of way.

And something else for folks to think about- considering that training is lifelong for a working dog...if a dog comes or goes from a different country, region, etc...they often get continuing education using the added and very diverse resources available to their handler.

 

[sarx]

Can someone point me to a link in regards to it being illegal to use actual human remains/scent in the UK? They used to be able to, so I'm a bit confused? TIA.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Can someone point me to a link in regards to it being illegal to use actual human remains/scent in the UK? They used to be able to, so I'm a bit confused? TIA.

This is what I found about the legality's of using human remains in the UK. It's called the Human Tissue Act 2004.

SCHEDULE 1Scheduled purposes Part 1 Purposes requiring consent: general1Anatomical examination.2Determining the cause of death.3Establishing after a person’s death the efficacy of any drug or other treatment administered to him.4Obtaining scientific or medical information about a living or deceased person which may be relevant to any other person (including a future person).5Public display.6Research in connection with disorders, or the functioning, of the human body.7Transplantation. Part 2 Purposes requiring consent: deceased persons8Clinical audit.9Education or training relating to human health.10Performance assessment.11Public health monitoring.12Quality assurance.

I don't see cadaver dog training listed on the scheduled purposes list but I may be misunderstanding something here.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/30/schedule/1

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/30/contents

 

[Oriah]

Another thing that I thought I should put out there- there is not a better 'test' of training logs, training, skill, etc than a handler that ends up in court and needs to produce evidence of their K9's training, alerts, consistancy, etc.
Trainers that mind their books- and are able to effectively communicate- usually much more effective than those who do not.

Mr. Grimes seems to do that.
(Of course, jmvho.)

 

[KsStormy]

Another thing that I thought I should put out there- there is not a better 'test' of training logs, training, skill, etc than a handler that ends up in court and needs to produce evidence of their K9's training, alerts, consistancy, etc.
Trainers that mind their books- and are able to effectively communicate- usually much more effective than those who do not.

Mr. Grimes seems to do that.
(Of course, jmvho.)

Thanks for your input, Oriah.

 

[4Jacy]

This case is so ugly that I believe I can't go on. Whatever happened to this baby, the friggin' parents know!! I posted before I couldn't believe DB could have harmed her child, but after hearing all your responses I'm not too sure....it's just not a world I know or understsnd.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Why does everyone here theorize that Lisa was deceased before leaving the house? What if she was injured from a fall that caused severe swelling but no bleeding, and in an attempt to cover up her negligence (intoxicated when an accident could took place) Lisa was removed from the home and passed before being disposed? The dog hit would make more sense next to moms bed if she was wearing clothing when Lisa was disposed of and that's where she undressed to pass out when she got home. JMO

I've wondered that same thing many times. The hit on the floor could be transfer from DB's clothes. Would certainly explain no hit in the car. I still wonder about the elementary school and nearby daycare (dumpsters) It's a short walk to either place.

BBM

If Debbie left her decomp scent laden clothes on the floor, then why didn't LE confiscate them? Where are these clothes that have the scent of a dead human on them? She passed out and then later hid the clothes?

Iamnotagolem, how does leaving decomp scented clothes on your bedroom floor after you have been in the car explain why the car has no decomp scent in it? MOO

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I found this link today that is titled "Forensic Evidence Canines".

Based upon our experiences in examining the above issues, we arrived at the following opinions and conclusions:

1) There is a significant potential for a dog handler to offer unintentionally misleading or improper testimony about the presence or absence of residual scent from decomposed human tissue.

Although this paper was written in 1998 it still gives me reason to question the reliability of dog handlers and their testimony in court. When I see things like this being said it makes me wonder.

The problems we identified are more that just seemingly esoteric. There are potentially significant issues of training and utilization that could make certain forms of testimony either misleading or totally unreliable. Our goal was to qualitatively examine certain dog behavior and training methods in order to make effective comments that would lead to progress in this field.

Hopefully things have changed since this paper was written. But since we know little about the "FBI dog" and handler in this case, we will have to wait until information about them is released in order to make an informed decision. MOO

http://www.csst.org/forensic_evidence_canines.html

 

[KsStormy]

BBM

If Debbie left her decomp scent laden clothes on the floor, then why didn't LE confiscate them? Where are these clothes that have the scent of a dead human on them? She passed out and then later hid the clothes?

Iamnotagolem, how does leaving decomp scented clothes on your bedroom floor after you have been in the car explain why the car has no decomp scent in it? MOO

Maybe because she took off the clothes & burned them in the dumpster? I am betting whatever shirt she was wearing when SB was over there drinking is long gone. Unless Lisa died after she went in & showered after Brando left, which judging by her hair in the news photos the next morning & lack of "bed-head" hair, she never went to sleep that night. I don't have time to hunt down the pics of that morning, but what mom has hair brushed so nicely after being "passed out drunk" then being awoken in the middle of the night to a missing baby??

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Maybe because she took off the clothes & burned them in the dumpster? I am betting whatever shirt she was wearing when SB was over there drinking is long gone. Unless Lisa died after she went in & showered after Brando left, which judging by her hair in the news photos the next morning & lack of "bed-head" hair, she never went to sleep that night. I don't have time to hunt down the pics of that morning, but what mom has hair brushed so nicely after being "passed out drunk" then being awoken in the middle of the night to a missing baby??

BBM

So Deborah's smart enough to get rid of her clothes because she knows that they have decomp scent on them but not smart enough to know that the scent would transfer from her clothes to the floor. I guess you do need contradictions like that to make things fit.

Bed head hair? So we have evidence of DB's guilt because she brushed her hair? MOO.

 

[KsStormy]

BBM

So Deborah's smart enough to get rid of her clothes because she knows that they have decomp scent on them but not smart enough to know that the scent would transfer from her clothes to the floor. I guess you do need contradictions like that to make things fit.

Bed head hair? So we have evidence of DB's guilt because she brushed her hair? MOO.

No, I do not believe she is smart at all;I believe she is just evil, manipulative & lucky, SO FAR.

MOO