Cadaver dog hit on scent in DBs bedroom

[Oriah]

Again, much like the shoe print outside the window (which turns out to be the gardener's or window cleaner's or the bloody shirt found crumpled up (that turns out to be from a kid getting smacked in the nose by a ball), HRD alerts fall right in there.

Oh, come on, you know you smell like a pig...:floorlaugh:

I hate you, sarx. :slap:
(Just kidding!)

I've got 27 different scent items out right now. Whatchugot??? Yay on competitive scent discrimination!

Ok- back on topic....

 

[Oriah]

Who knows, maybe this HRD dog was also trained in narc work and was looking for drugs or excretions from a user. We really have no idea and there are a whole lot of possibilities....

I think the point sarx is making (please correct if misunderstanding, sarx) is that since we do not know what dogs were used during the 17 hr search- we do not know what they may have alerted on- or with what accuracity.
It is entirely possible that they were not HRD dogs at all. Or were (!)

We just don't know.

 

[sarx]

I hate you, sarx. :slap:
(Just kidding!)

I've got 27 different scent items out right now. Whatchugot??? Yay on competitive scent discrimination!

Ok- back on topic....

At the moment, 4, pulled pork, chicken nuggets and toenails from 2 "victims".:great:

Sorry, couldn't help myself, but now I'm kinda hungry and grossed out all at the same time.

 

[Oriah]

At the moment, 4, pulled pork, chicken nuggets and toenails from 2 "victims".:great:

Sorry, couldn't help myself, but now I'm kinda hungry and grossed out all at the same time.

Go eat, sarx. Not the toenails. Real Fud.
If you don't, I will be forced to send you a diabetic alert dog.

OKAY- back on topic everyone...

 

[Whisperer]

I want to know why this wealthy benefactor is paying for the defense of the parents. What has piked her interest in this case more than others?

 

[Whisperer]

I'm still sticking with the dog finding what it was supposed to find...evidence of human decomposition. There is more of a chance Lisa died there than not....with the hit.

 

[1&2&3]

I'm still sticking with the dog finding what it was supposed to find...evidence of human decomposition. There is more of a chance Lisa died there than not....with the hit.

And why was that not enough evidence for an arrest?

 

[Karmaa]

K9 HRD alerts are usually used for either reasonable cause or probable cause for SW's in my experience.

And no- porcine scent is nowhere near the same as human cadavaric scent, or a pseudo scent, for a properly trained dog.

Moo, of course.

I completely understand what you are saying. A top-of-the-line dog with a really conscientious handler would use the best tools available, and would be exponentially better than a sloppy trainer with a poorly trained dog.

But, pork carcasses are used for training scents when trainers can't or wont jump through the hoops they have to to get human cadaver scent. And pseudo-scents are used as well, though not too much anymore. This is a really good (old) article on it: http://discovermagazine.com/1996/mar/thefakesmellofde714

Human is best. Pork is probably next best. I would hope that KCMO has human-trained dogs available, but as you said - who knows how the particular dog that made the hit in this case was trained?

If all LE was looking for was a hit - any hit - to get probable cause for a warrant, they might not have brought the best trained dog to the scene. If they were legitimately checking for human decomp, then they probably would have gotten the best out there. Unfortunately, since we don't know what they do, we have no way of knowing what they were going for.

 

[Whisperer]

And why was that not enough evidence for an arrest?

It was enough for a search warrant. ..but LE needs more than a smell. Jurors aren't going to buy the fact that a dog smelled a deceased person.

Looks like people choose not to believe in dog reliability. Take Casey Anthony...those jurors chose not to believe the dogs. it is very hard nowadays to prove a murder w/o a body. Jurors are dismissing stuff we used to take for granted as reliable.

 

[Whisperer]

We need some profiles of Jeremy and DB. I have DB as impulsive and histrionic. She may be OCD. I can't get any kind of reading on JI.Has his family gave any kind of interview about him?

Was there any trouble in the relationship? Of course, they won't let it out, now, if there was..

 

[Donjeta]

Cadaver dogs hitting on a ham sandwich would be more likely to hit in the kitchen than the bedroom. moo.

 

[tink92]

It was enough for a search warrant. ..but LE needs more than a smell. Jurors aren't going to buy the fact that a dog smelled a deceased person.

Looks like people choose not to believe in dog reliability. Take Casey Anthony...those jurors chose not to believe the dogs. it is very hard nowadays to prove a murder w/o a body. Jurors are dismissing stuff we used to take for granted as reliable.

This is a good point!...Plus in the casey trial we had an abundance of other evidence .new fangled experts were brought in..new machines..etc etc..all point to decomp in the trunk of the car. They didn't rely only on the dogs hit.

I think we all knew for sure that caylees body had been in that boot..and yet the jury STILL didn't buy it??...They said there was no PROOF that a body had been in the trunk?? (will always baffle me but anyway):banghead:

In this case i think it could have been a false hit by only one dog....no way would that hold up as much at all in court. There is as far as we know no other evidence..like decomp hairs..decomp stains..insects (yuck) that we had in the casey trial...and none of that even stuck.

 

[Oriah]

And why was that not enough evidence for an arrest?

Because arrest...who?

A properly trained and utilized HRD dog, alerting on a location in a home, likely means that there is the presence of human remains at that site.
But that is not grounds for arresting anyone.
I mean, it's possible that an unknown intruder injured Lisa in the process of abducting her in such a manner as to leave behind evidence of human remains- you know?

Not saying that's my theory, just that it is a possibility.

 

[~n/t~]

Because arrest...who?

A properly trained and utilized HRD dog, alerting on a location in a home, likely means that there is the presence of human remains at that site.
But that is no grounds for arresting anyone.
I mean, it's possible that an unknown intruder injured Lisa in the process of abducting her in such a manner as to leave behind evidence of human remains- you know?
Not saying that's my theory, just that it is a possibility.

bbm.....I'm not sure I understand the bolded part in your statement. If she was injured, why would the cadaver dog pick up human remains scent?

 

[natsound]

I'm still sticking with the dog finding what it was supposed to find...evidence of human decomposition. There is more of a chance Lisa died there than not....with the hit.

I am too. I consider this a no-brainer (I hope I do have a brain, and I'm right).

 

[scmom]

The problem seems to be that people who don't know the capabilities of HRD dogs refuse to allow themselves to be educated on the matter. Which brings me to the question of bringing the dog to the courtroom to demonstrate the area of expertise in question.

 

[natsound]

Because arrest...who?

A properly trained and utilized HRD dog, alerting on a location in a home, likely means that there is the presence of human remains at that site.
But that is no grounds for arresting anyone.
I mean, it's possible that an unknown intruder injured Lisa in the process of abducting her in such a manner as to leave behind evidence of human remains- you know?

Not saying that's my theory, just that it is a possibility.

BBM

This is a very important sentence. Thank you Oriah.

 

[~n/t~]

The problem seems to be that people who don't know the capabilities of HRD dogs refuse to allow themselves to be educated on the matter. Which brings me to the question of bringing the dog to the courtroom to demonstrate the area of expertise in question.

Too risky, imo I don't think any attorney would go that route but I could be wrong. IMO, showing a video and detailed certification of the dog (s) and perhaps written testimonials from previous cases (although I'm not sure a Judge would allow it) would be a lot safer than the dog getting a false positive in front of a jury.

 

[scmom]

Too risky, imo I don't think any attorney would go that route but I could be wrong. IMO, showing a video and detailed certification of the dog (s) and perhaps written testimonials from previous cases (although I'm not sure a Judge would allow it) would be a lot safer than the dog getting a false positive in front of a jury.

I think a simple demonstration could be used, see it yourself, so to speak, to demonstrate that a HRD dog trained to alert only to actual human remains, not synthetic, not cross-trained, will not alert on things like garbage, feces, urine, etc. I do think a video and testimonials could be used, but I think most of us saw that at least one jury chose to ignore the "testimony" of the dogs, as well as the testimony of human witnesses regarding the scent of decomposition.

 

[Oriah]

I completely understand what you are saying. A top-of-the-line dog with a really conscientious handler would use the best tools available, and would be exponentially better than a sloppy trainer with a poorly trained dog.

But, pork carcasses are used for training scents when trainers can't or wont jump through the hoops they have to to get human cadaver scent. And pseudo-scents are used as well, though not too much anymore. This is a really good (old) article on it: http://discovermagazine.com/1996/mar/thefakesmellofde714

Human is best. Pork is probably next best. I would hope that KCMO has human-trained dogs available, but as you said - who knows how the particular dog that made the hit in this case was trained?

If all LE was looking for was a hit - any hit - to get probable cause for a warrant, they might not have brought the best trained dog to the scene. If they were legitimately checking for human decomp, then they probably would have gotten the best out there. Unfortunately, since we don't know what they do, we have no way of knowing what they were going for.

BBM:
There is no such thing as 'next best' when it comes to scent discrimination in working dogs. One cannot successfully train a dog to scent discriminate at an advanced level on secondary scents. All you can do is proof them OFF of that scent. Thus the not alerting on the ham sandwich in the kitchen.

You are correct in that many trainers and handlers DO cut corners and are lazy in proofing their dogs.

But- imvho- the FBI doesn't.