Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #22

[C.greek]

Another interesting point is mentioned in Martin Grime's report when he talks about Eddie's alert to cadaver scent near the cupboard -

“What we have to be able to understand in a situation such as this is in a hot climate with the apartment being closed down, the scent will build up in a particular area. If there isn’t a scent source in here, i.e. a physical article where the scent is emitting from, any scent residue will collect in a particular place due to the air movement of the flat, the apartment and what I would say in this case is that there is enough scent in that area there for him to give me a bark indication but the source may not be in that cupboard, the source may well be in this room somewhere else but the air is actually pushing into that corner.”

So, what he's saying is the scent isn't actually sitting on something like a blood stain or piece of DNA would be. But because the scent has been in that apartment, it is still in the air and the air flow is just pushing it to towards an area with the least air flow, so that the smell concentrates there. A cupboard which is far from a window or door being a logical place it would collect and get trapped.

There's the possibility therefore IMO, that the origin of the scent wasn't even in the parent's room, but in MM's room. The sheets that MM lay on were not in the room by then, so all the dog is possibly picking up is residual scent left in the air, which by then could have spread everywhere given the traffic going on around the apartment in the prior weeks.

How about the alert in the garden? Could they be related? Aka the wind brought the scent into the apartment from the garden? (Do these dogs only detect human cadaver? )

 

[tedtink]

Another interesting point is mentioned in Martin Grime's report when he talks about Eddie's alert to cadaver scent near the cupboard -

“What we have to be able to understand in a situation such as this is in a hot climate with the apartment being closed down, the scent will build up in a particular area. If there isn’t a scent source in here, i.e. a physical article where the scent is emitting from, any scent residue will collect in a particular place due to the air movement of the flat, the apartment and what I would say in this case is that there is enough scent in that area there for him to give me a bark indication but the source may not be in that cupboard, the source may well be in this room somewhere else but the air is actually pushing into that corner.”

So, what he's saying is the scent isn't actually sitting on something like a blood stain or piece of DNA would be. But because the scent has been in that apartment, it is still in the air and the air flow is just pushing it to towards an area with the least air flow, so that the smell concentrates there. A cupboard which is far from a window or door being a logical place it would collect and get trapped.

There's the possibility therefore IMO, that the origin of the scent wasn't even in the parent's room, but in MM's room. The sheets that MM lay on were not in the room by then, so all the dog is possibly picking up is residual scent left in the air, which by then could have spread everywhere given the traffic going on around the apartment in the prior weeks.

Quite.
There's every reason the cadaver on KM's clothes and the car door were cross 'contaminated'. ie Were never in direct contact with a corpse.

This is of course related to the theory of MM dying at the hands of suspect in 5a and not the MC's.
imo

 

[misty48]

I get what you are saying but we need to remember that these dogs (and all professional CSI dogs) do make mistakes. Their accuracy is not 100% and as far as i've understood they cannot be used as evidence in court unless corroborated with other evidence.

The dog alerts have always been the single most persuasive argument pointing to the parents' guilt. I think it's difficult for many armchair sleuths to correlate CB or anyone else swiftly removing from 5A either a living child or a child only dead for moments with the cadaver dog alerts. HCW did say it was only his opinion Madeleine died in Portugal (Sexta9) which was as non-specific as the officer could be.

 

[C.greek]

The dog alerts have always been the single most persuasive argument pointing to the parents' guilt. I think it's difficult for many armchair sleuths to correlate CB or anyone else swiftly removing from 5A either a living child or a child only dead for moments with the cadaver dog alerts. HCW did say it was only his opinion Madeleine died in Portugal (Sexta9) which was as non-specific as the officer could be.

I am not very certain what exactly you mean. HCW said CB killed MM. So if she was not killed in 5a, how did the cadaver scent found its way there? Unless it can be explained by the scent travelling from outside and lingering into the cupboard from someone else's unrelated death.

 

[Lyndaloo]

I am not very certain what exactly you mean. HCW said CB killed MM. So if she was not killed in 5a, how did the cadaver scent found its way there? Unless it can be explained by the scent travelling from outside and lingering into the cupboard from someone else's unrelated death.

Perhaps deliberately contaminated by someone with access to 5a sometime after the Mccanns left the apartment but before the dogs arrived? Eg maybe someone who worked for ocean club or someone closely connected to the police investigation...we all know how much Amaral wanted to nail the McCanns....could be a similar scenario with the McCanns hire car.....all just my own opinion.

 

[Sillybilly]

Too many off topic and personalizing posts, and discussions about removed posts and moderation * are having to be removed in this thread. This is time consuming for our few Moderators who are very busy with many other threads.

ALL members need to read The Rules and post in accordance with them or this thread will be closed and only the Media *NO DISCUSSION* thread will be left open.

* These TOS violations are subject to automatic temporary or permanent loss of posting privileges.

 

[Nikolai_ff]

If the DNA analysis of the car found no Maddy DNA... why do we even care the dogs were alerted to some smell?

 

[Dlk79]

How about the alert in the garden? Could they be related? Aka the wind brought the scent into the apartment from the garden? (Do these dogs only detect human cadaver? )

IMO I don't know how much certainty we can attribute to the 'alert' in the garden. I know it's mentioned in the PJ files, but I've not seen any actual footage of it. And I've heard it referred to in some places as a 'soft alert', almost like the dog is saying "maybe". And I can't find anything where Martin Grime himself talks about it, to know his opinion of Eddie's reaction in the garden. All it seems to say in his report is:

"Outside perimeter of apartments

We've searched the outer perimeter, there is some interest here but it will take some further examination to see what's going on."
P.J. POLICE FILES: EDDIE & KEELA MARTIN GRIME REPORT

That language doesn't have the same certainty as when he talks about the other alerts. So are the PJ just taking that comment and calling it another 'alert'? Has anyone got any links to anything else that gives some more context to what happened for this 'apparent' alert? Maybe I've just missed it but I'm not convinced about this one just yet. I'm wondering if Eddie is just picking 'something' up there, that perhaps 'resemebles' what he is looking for. Maybe a spot where a dead bird or other small animal has decomposed for example.

 

[Nikolai_ff]

Is there any scientific literature on how often the dogs get it wrong?

 

[Dlk79]

If the DNA analysis of the car found no Maddy DNA... why do we even care the dogs were alerted to some smell?

We're considering a theory whereby CB might have killed MM in the apartment. And that the other cadaver alerts were caused by cross-contamination. Where different things have come into contact with wherever her body was situated prior to being removed.

 

[redplanet]

Quite.
There's every reason the cadaver on KM's clothes and the car door were cross 'contaminated'. ie Were never in direct contact with a corpse.

This is of course related to the theory of MM dying at the hands of suspect in 5a and not the MC's.
imo

Agreed absolutely this discussion is about alerts being the result of the actions of a criminal intruder, no-one else.
Is it reasonable at first to at least consider direct contact (caused by placement by the intruder)?

 

[redplanet]

We're considering a theory whereby CB might have killed MM in the apartment. And that the other cadaver alerts were caused by cross-contamination. Where different things have come into contact with wherever her body was situated prior to being removed.

Agreed, this is about the intruder did. IMO an issue with not invoking something like direct contact at some stage, is that there is then nothing to start off a proposed chain of cross-contamination.

 

[tedtink]

IMO I don't know how much certainty we can attribute to the 'alert' in the garden. I know it's mentioned in the PJ files, but I've not seen any actual footage of it. And I've heard it referred to in some places as a 'soft alert', almost like the dog is saying "maybe". And I can't find anything where Martin Grime himself talks about it, to know his opinion of Eddie's reaction in the garden. All it seems to say in his report is:

"Outside perimeter of apartments

We've searched the outer perimeter, there is some interest here but it will take some further examination to see what's going on."
P.J. POLICE FILES: EDDIE & KEELA MARTIN GRIME REPORT

That language doesn't have the same certainty as when he talks about the other alerts. So are the PJ just taking that comment and calling it another 'alert'? Has anyone got any links to anything else that gives some more context to what happened for this 'apparent' alert? Maybe I've just missed it but I'm not convinced about this one just yet. I'm wondering if Eddie is just picking 'something' up there, that perhaps 'resemebles' what he is looking for. Maybe a spot where a dead bird or other small animal has decomposed for example.

Yes, here's the video from which the exact words of the report were taken, outside 5a [email protected]

 

[tedtink]

Agreed, this is about the intruder did. IMO an issue with not invoking something like direct contact at some stage, is that there is then nothing to start off a proposed chain of cross-contamination.

Items of clothing or other objects don't necessarily have to come into contact with a corpse for cross contamination to occur.
They only need to come into contact with the cadaver smell or odour.
The 'odour' can travel and 'settle' in area's or on objects.
I think these area's, like the cupboard and cuddle cat, are where MG means a 'soft alert' ie odour that has moved around the building.

 

[Dlk79]

Yes, here's the video from which the exact words of the report were taken, outside 5a [email protected]

Thanks Ted. Not a very convincing bark alert there to me when compared to the others.

 

[redplanet]

One can do a tardis sort of thing across about 12 weeks by combining stills from the video of Eddie in the apartment, with the photos taken in the apartment by the police just a few hours after the disappearance, this being to help work out what the intruder did.

 

[redplanet]

Items of clothing or other objects don't necessarily have to come into contact with a corpse for cross contamination to occur.
They only need to come into contact with the cadaver smell or odour.
The 'odour' can travel and 'settle' in area's or on objects.
I think these area's, like the cupboard and cuddle cat, are where MG means a 'soft alert' ie odour that has moved around the building.

Yes. But it does not have to be without contact. An item of clothing can become alertable by direct contact. A chain of cross-contamination caused by the intruder has at its beginning IMO direct contact with a surface or with something.

 

[redplanet]

Thanks Ted. Not a very convincing bark alert there to me when compared to the others.

Interesting IMO is molecular sensor location @1:06 which can be correlated with PJ 4 May photography and with a Sept statement, to effectively populate the blank background of the part empty room with objects, this all being to try to find out whether the criminal intruder entered this room and what he did there.

 

[C.greek]

Re the dogs, The below is from Grime himself - Volume IX pages 2473 - 2477 August 2007

Martin Grime
UK NPIA Registered Subject Matter Expert
FBI Forensic Canine Program Specialist Adviser

"My professional opinion as regards to the EVRD's alert indications is that it is suggestive that this is 'cadaver scent' contaminant. This does not however suggest a motive or suspect as cross contamination could be as a result of a number of given scenarios and in any event no evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from these alerts unless they can be confirmed with corroborating evidence."

IMO this means there is no certainty whatsoever about a death in 5a based on the canine detection.

 

[redplanet]

IMO I don't know how much certainty we can attribute to the 'alert' in the garden. I know it's mentioned in the PJ files, but I've not seen any actual footage of it. And I've heard it referred to in some places as a 'soft alert', almost like the dog is saying "maybe". And I can't find anything where Martin Grime himself talks about it, to know his opinion of Eddie's reaction in the garden. All it seems to say in his report is:

"Outside perimeter of apartments

We've searched the outer perimeter, there is some interest here but it will take some further examination to see what's going on."
P.J. POLICE FILES: EDDIE & KEELA MARTIN GRIME REPORT

That language doesn't have the same certainty as when he talks about the other alerts. So are the PJ just taking that comment and calling it another 'alert'? Has anyone got any links to anything else that gives some more context to what happened for this 'apparent' alert? Maybe I've just missed it but I'm not convinced about this one just yet. I'm wondering if Eddie is just picking 'something' up there, that perhaps 'resemebles' what he is looking for. Maybe a spot where a dead bird or other small animal has decomposed for example.

Eddie barks a little in the flowerbed, and also through the balcony railings directly above. Cuttings were taken from that climbing plant, which were examined forensically.