Answering questions about why these dogs are being brought in now instead of earlier, Pike responded:
“We deploy dogs when they’re best suited to the information or the investigation details that we have.”
Tremblay added: “What’s important to remember is that at this time, we don’t have any definitive information to support that the children are deceased, but we have to keep our minds open and look at all the investigative avenues.”
***
I don’t see these comments as contradictory, not necessarily.
The first part - “ we deploy dogs when they’re best suited to the information” - what is that information? A belief that the children are dead. If not, why else would they choose now to bring in cadaver dogs?
But there is a difference between a belief that the children are dead and knowledge that the children are dead.
If I recall correctly, over 50 people have been interviewed in this case. When making statements, these interviewees lock in their story, where they were, when, what they were doing, who they were with.
Investigators have also combed through phones, trail cameras footage, etc. I believe it’s possible they’ve found a discrepancy in someone’s story. For example, someone said they were at work, or asleep, or at home watching tv, but they were actually seen on trail cam footage miles away, or their cell phone pinged in a particular area. If their story is untruthful, why would they be lying? But unless there’s footage of said individual with the kids, or carrying their little bodies, LE can honestly say, “we don’t have any definitive information to support that the children are deceased”. At this point, they would only know, someone was untruthful about their whereabouts at the time of the children’s disappearance. And, these examples of cell phone pings or trail cam footage could indicate an area to potentially search with cadaver dogs.
IMO, cadaver dogs are now being employed to follow up on some sort of information, however weak, and not just because they can’t think of anything else to do.
Just imo
