Cadaver dog hit on scent in DBs bedroom

[Deleted member 39678]

didn't JT "try" to explain the hit as being dirty diapers or toe nails or "about 10 non-human things"? i didn't hear anything about why there was blood on an area near the floor in the bedroom...

In my opinion Joe Tacopina doesn't know what he's talking about. If he said tooth instead of toenail he would have been right. As for why blood could be on the bedroom floor is because it's not an uncommon occurrence for someone to sustain an injury and bleed. So it's not hard to imagine that sometime in the past someone bled onto the bedroom floor and the "FBI" dog alerted to that blood.

We know that well trained HRD dogs have excellent accuracy rates above 90%. But we also should keep in mind the limitations of what a positive hit can tell us. Can the "FBI" dog hit in the bedroom tell us for certain that a dead Lisa Irwin was in that room? In my opinion the answer is no.

http://dogsdontlie.com/main/2008/12/cadaver-dogs-how-reliable-are-they-at-detecting-death/

 

[KsStormy]

I wonder if the dogs hit anywhere else? There has to be something that the police or FBI knows that made KCPD release the statement in October that they still have questions for Bradley.No there persons of interest were mentioned in the release or at any other time.

Police have exhausted leads provided by Lisa Irwin’s family and their attorneys, and the leads
were of no benefit to the investigation. While communication with the family has been ongoing,
police have not had the opportunity to sit down one-on-one to speak with Lisa’s mother,
Deborah Bradley. As the only adult in the home at the time of the baby’s disappearance, police
continue to have questions to which only she can provide answers.

http://www.kcmo.org/idc/groups/police/documents/police/pr_09.28.12_lisairwin1stannive.pdf

 

[brit1981]

Again does it not depend on the individuel dogs. A WS expert on here states their dogs would not alert to something like hair or nail, but the expert in the anthony case states her dogs did. Plus the dogs used in the jersey case (and mccann case) alerts to bodily fluids from living donors (and in the jersey case was found to have correctly alerted to tissues used to clean up after sexual intercourse). Then there is the shannon mathews case where the dogs alertd and she was found alive, and the swedish thomas quick fiasco where the dogs alerted at the places he said he buried the bodies, and then it turned out he had had nothing to do with the killings and there had never been bodies there.
Its not an exact science, and each case needs to be examined carefully before assuming that the dogs alert to dead bodies and dead bodies only, and that they are always accurate.
Plus there is also the fact thta the dogs do tell us who was dead, and who killed them. If someone broke into the house to take the baby and accidently killed her, surely the dog woudl alert to that too?
Also how in over a year have th epolic ento had the opportunity to speak to db?

 

[norest4thewicked]

Again does it not depend on the individuel dogs. A WS expert on here states their dogs would not alert to something like hair or nail, but the expert in the anthony case states her dogs did. Plus the dogs used in the jersey case (and mccann case) alerts to bodily fluids from living donors (and in the jersey case was found to have correctly alerted to tissues used to clean up after sexual intercourse). Then there is the shannon mathews case where the dogs alertd and she was found alive, and the swedish thomas quick fiasco where the dogs alerted at the places he said he buried the bodies, and then it turned out he had had nothing to do with the killings and there had never been bodies there.
Its not an exact science, and each case needs to be examined carefully before assuming that the dogs alert to dead bodies and dead bodies only, and that they are always accurate.
Plus there is also the fact thta the dogs do tell us who was dead, and who killed them. If someone broke into the house to take the baby and accidently killed her, surely the dog woudl alert to that too?
Also how in over a year have th epolic ento had the opportunity to speak to db?

That is a problem, for those who feel that there are variables. If there truly were that many variables, what would be the point of having dogs at all? They would be worthless. Different dogs are trained to look for different things. HRD dogs hit on human remains. Human remains are remains of a human after they have died. Whether it be skin cells from a deceased human or a full dead body. They CAN alert on hair or fingernails, but only those of a deceased human.

They also have dogs to find living humans. These are not HR dogs. I am not familiar with a lot of other cases, but I don't think that LE generally specifies WHICH type of dog they are using. In Lisa's case, since this is her thread, I would say that they most likely used HR dogs as well as tracking dogs. For all we know, they could have used drug dogs even. In that case, they would have used three types of dogs. So, we can't assume that they were all the same type of training.

Since I do know that they used an HR dog during the search warrant (where they were looking for signs of human remains), and the dog alerted, this is good enough for me.

 

[Chris_Texas]

That is a problem, for those who feel that there are variables. If there truly were that many variables, what would be the point of having dogs at all? They would be worthless. Different dogs are trained to look for different things. HRD dogs hit on human remains. Human remains are remains of a human after they have died. Whether it be skin cells from a deceased human or a full dead body. They CAN alert on hair or fingernails, but only those of a deceased human.

They also have dogs to find living humans. These are not HR dogs. I am not familiar with a lot of other cases, but I don't think that LE generally specifies WHICH type of dog they are using. In Lisa's case, since this is her thread, I would say that they most likely used HR dogs as well as tracking dogs. For all we know, they could have used drug dogs even. In that case, they would have used three types of dogs. So, we can't assume that they were all the same type of training.

Since I do know that they used an HR dog during the search warrant (where they were looking for signs of human remains), and the dog alerted, this is good enough for me.

It's good enough for me as well, though largely because it fits in so well with the other facts of this case.

On the other hand, of all the cases I have followed here I don't recall even a single one in which the dogs were of any use whatsoever. I'm sure they must do something useful sometimes, otherwise LE wouldn't bother, but they seem pretty hit or miss to me.

No offense intended to the fine folks who train and work with these animals.

 

[norest4thewicked]

It's good enough for me as well, though largely because it fits in so well with the other facts of this case.

On the other hand, of all the cases I have followed here I don't recall even a single one in which the dogs were of any use whatsoever. I'm sure they must do something useful sometimes, otherwise LE wouldn't bother, but they seem pretty hit or miss to me.

No offense intended to the fine folks who train and work with these animals.

As I said earlier, I'm not familiar with other cases and what the dogs did or didn't do. However, given the facts of THIS case, I feel that the dog hit in THIS case does fit well with what I believe - that something happened in the home and that Lisa was disposed of by the mother alone or the mother and someone else.

 

[KsStormy]

As I said earlier, I'm not familiar with other cases and what the dogs did or didn't do. However, given the facts of THIS case, I feel that the dog hit in THIS case does fit well with what I believe - that something happened in the home and that Lisa was disposed of by the mother alone or the mother and someone else.

I agree. I think it is just too much of a stretch/coincidence that a hit by a HRD dog occurred in the home where a baby is missing.

 

[norest4thewicked]

I agree. I think it is just too much of a stretch/coincidence that a hit by a HRD dog occurred in the home where a baby is missing.

Yes, and including all of the other "coincidences" in this case - it doesn't take any stretch at all to make me believe that Lisa is no longer with us and (at least) her mother knows where she is. THEN, when you bring in Occam's Razor theory, there it is!

 

[Clutchbag]

I agree. I think it is just too much of a stretch/coincidence that a hit by a HRD dog occurred in the home where a baby is missing.

and that is the crux, if missing people were turning up left right and centre after cadaver dogs were alerting to the last place they were seen they would be made redundant

fact is they are found dead 99.99% of the time, you cant argue with that unless you are defending someone who has something to hide basically, its very simple

 

[cityslick]

and that is the crux, if missing people were turning up left right and centre after cadaver dogs were alerting to the last place they were seen they would be made redundant

fact is they are found dead 99.99% of the time, you cant argue with that unless you are defending someone who has something to hide basically, its very simple

Not all cadaver dog hits result in someone being actually dead. SAR experts throughout this thread have posted as such. Ask any SAR dog handler if a hit is an automatic that someone died and the answer will be that by itself, the answer is no. For the answer to be yes depends on a bunch of other factors.

 

[norest4thewicked]

Ask any SAR expert about a dog hitting on a spot in a house where there is a missing baby, parents won't continue to talk to LE in hopes of bringing their child home, where mother was drinking all night, where dad worked his first "all night" shift, where mother gives inconsistencies in media interviews, where parents "cut off" LE after the first couple of days and won't any longer talk to them, where parents won't let LE talk to children who were there in the house, where the mother said that she was "afraid to look in the back yard", where LE took tape from the home and the children in the house said they heard "clicking", etc. etc. etc. - Call me crazy...but to me, these ARE the other factors.

 

[cityslick]

Ask any SAR expert about a dog hitting on a spot in a house where there is a missing baby, parents won't continue to talk to LE in hopes of bringing their child home, where mother was drinking all night, where dad worked his first "all night" shift, where mother gives inconsistencies in media interviews, where parents "cut off" LE after the first couple of days and won't any longer talk to them, where parents won't let LE talk to children who were there in the house, where the mother said that she was "afraid to look in the back yard", where LE took tape from the home and the children in the house said they heard "clicking", etc. etc. etc. - Call me crazy...but to me, these ARE the other factors.

They are not evidence. They are just actions that you perceive as guilty. If it were as simple as everything you describe, she would already be in jail on charges for being responsible for the disappearance of her daughter.

 

[norest4thewicked]

They are not evidence. They are just actions that you perceive as guilty. If it were as simple as everything you describe, she would already be in jail on charges for being responsible for the disappearance of her daughter.

No one said they were evidence. And no one said it was simple. Yes, I do perceive them as guilty. It doesn't necessarily mean that they ARE guilty. But, it is simple logic and the majority of the time, as well as statistics show that this is the most likely scenario. Occam's Razor and all.

No one has to agree with me. It's my opinion and I stand by it.

 

[Clutchbag]

I agree. I think it is just too much of a stretch/coincidence that a hit by a HRD dog occurred in the home where a baby is missing.

Missing people do not turn up after a cadaver dog has hit in the last place they were seen, only in a tiny amount of cases, you can count on three fingers at best, for fluke reasons, the vast majority are found dead

As for people quoting the casey anthony case and saying the handler said hrds can alert to toenails or hair from living people, well what a moot point, caylee was found dead! Her own father a seasoned policeman knowing the stench of death said he smelt it in the car boot, so how the link is made between hairs from the living and highly trained cadaver dogs in thatcase is bizarre at best lol
:banghead:

Same goes for big joe t saying human cadaver dogs react to at least ten non human things, where is his list? i could do with a laugh!

That said dog alerts are never taken as sole evidence, there is always tonnes of circumstantial evidence which tends to prove towards the dog alerts being right than the other way, its up to the courts to decide, and of course lets not forget confessions and other non circumstantial evidence that bangs the guilty up, the dogs are a very serious and solid part of any imvestigation, they always always point to justifiable suspicion to be checked out and thank god for them

 

[Whisperer]

They are not evidence. They are just actions that you perceive as guilty. If it were as simple as everything you describe, she would already be in jail on charges for being responsible for the disappearance of her daughter.

not necessarily, but these facts do indicate guilt in the behavior. These actions do not just hit one or two people as guilty buy almost everyone except those who behave or are defense attorneys.

We know very well that these parents act guilty and if weren't for their high paid defenders, one or both would be looking at some jail time. The attorneys stopped the police questioning/interrogation. It is very likely LE would have found out what happened to Lisa if not for the professor, cindy short, joe tacopino and j.picerno.

Quite a lot of interference being run for them by high profile criminal defense attorneys. When you need this many attorneys to stop the police from questioning you about your missing baby, it appears you are most likely guilty. I have kept in mind that three of these four ARE criminal defense attorneys not simply a civil attorney to consult with regarding their situation. Their situation remains critical because they behave like parents who are guilty and want and need high profile attorneys to keep LE from asking them the hard questions. Many know exactly what these parents are doing and it more than protecting their rights. It is covering up their crime.



.....Shame on the parents!

 

[Deleted member 39678]

That is a problem, for those who feel that there are variables. If there truly were that many variables, what would be the point of having dogs at all? They would be worthless. Different dogs are trained to look for different things. HRD dogs hit on human remains. Human remains are remains of a human after they have died. Whether it be skin cells from a deceased human or a full dead body. They CAN alert on hair or fingernails, but only those of a deceased human.

They also have dogs to find living humans. These are not HR dogs. I am not familiar with a lot of other cases, but I don't think that LE generally specifies WHICH type of dog they are using. In Lisa's case, since this is her thread, I would say that they most likely used HR dogs as well as tracking dogs. For all we know, they could have used drug dogs even. In that case, they would have used three types of dogs. So, we can't assume that they were all the same type of training.

Since I do know that they used an HR dog during the search warrant (where they were looking for signs of human remains), and the dog alerted, this is good enough for me.

I'm not sure what you mean by "variables"? And why would these "variables" render working dogs worthless?

I always have understood that working dogs trained in one discipline means that they will only provide results in that discipline. In other words you can't take a dog that's trained in trailing and expect it to give you good (or any) results in human remains detection (HRD).

As for what "human remains" actually are I guess that can be debated. But we know that HRD dogs are trained with things that can come from a person who is not dead yet. Bone, fluid and tissue. I don't even want to comment on the hair and fingernail issue from the Anthony trial. I think that's a stretch. Decomposing blood from a living person is not a stretch.

http://www.nndda.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=86&Itemid=55

The last point I what to make in response is that the "FBI" dog made the "hit" on Oct 17th during a search with the consent of Jeremy Irwin before the search warrant was executed on Oct 19th.

The affidavit also revealed that "On October 17, 2011, an FBI cadaver dog was brought into the residence upon consent of (Jeremy) Irwin and Bradley. The cadaver dog indicated a positive 'hit' for the scent of a deceased human in an area of the floor of Bradley's bedroom near the bed."

I feel that they used the "FBI" dog hit to help obtain the search warrant that enabled LE to do a very through forensic search using state of the art equipment and personal. Having a search warrant would allow any forensic evidence found during the search to be used later in court. The fact that LE removed very few items from the home during the search warrant gives me some concern. And the fact that there hasn't been an arrest yet makes me wonder if the forensic evidence that was collected is meager as well.

http://media2.nbcactionnews.com/NWT/pdf/20111021_irwinwarrant.pdf

Read more: http://www.kmbc.com/Lisa-Irwin-Sear...12264286/-/108618q/-/index.html#ixzz2EzafxQnc

 

[cityslick]

No one said they were evidence. And no one said it was simple. Yes, I do perceive them as guilty. It doesn't necessarily mean that they ARE guilty. But, it is simple logic and the majority of the time, as well as statistics show that this is the most likely scenario. Occam's Razor and all.

No one has to agree with me. It's my opinion and I stand by it.

The point is that you listed all those as 'factors' to reinforce the cadaver dog hit and they are not, they are opinions, you just admitted that they are. There is nothing else that we know of that reinforces the cadaver dog hit. No additional hits, evidence around the hit (like fingerprints perhaps), etc.

 

[Nom de plume]

No one said they were evidence. And no one said it was simple. Yes, I do perceive them as guilty. It doesn't necessarily mean that they ARE guilty. But, it is simple logic and the majority of the time, as well as statistics show that this is the most likely scenario. Occam's Razor and all.

No one has to agree with me. It's my opinion and I stand by it.

BBM Exactly! If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's probably not a rhinoceros! :banghead:

Unfortunately, we've all seen many missing child cases. I think it's pretty obvious by now, at least to most of us, when the parent and/or parents are innocent and when they are guilty. Innocent people put their missing child first, guilty people put themselves first.

As norest said, no one has to agree with me, but I believe this to be true.

 

[KsStormy]

BBM Exactly! If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's probably not a rhinoceros! :banghead:

Unfortunately, we've all seen many missing child cases. I think it's pretty obvious by now, at least to most of us, when the parent and/or parents are innocent and when they are guilty. Innocent people put their missing child first, guilty people put themselves first.

As norest said, no one has to agree with me, but I believe this to be true.

BBM


So true! One of the things that really bugged me is the way that Bradley stated she didn't ask her kids what they heard, didn't "compare notes" with the drinking buddy, didn't talk to Jeremy about that night.... :what: :waitasec:

 

[norest4thewicked]

The point is that you listed all those as 'factors' to reinforce the cadaver dog hit and they are not, they are opinions, you just admitted that they are. There is nothing else that we know of that reinforces the cadaver dog hit. No additional hits, evidence around the hit (like fingerprints perhaps), etc.

Isn't most of what we say here on the forum "opinion?"