"Who would leave children that young alone?"

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #901
Eddie, who has been called ‘the cadaver dog’, can detect the presence of human ‘cadaverine’, a special chemical released from a dead body, usually after the body has been dead for at least two hours (sometimes as short as an hour-and-a-half). It’s important to understand that Eddie is trained only to scent the presence of the special type of cadaverine released by a human corpse. The scent of death from animals is a different form of cadaverine. Keela is a dog trained specifically to detect the presence of blood. She is therefore what is popularly known as a ‘blood-hound’. She has been trained to ignore decomposing body materials other than human blood, freezing with her nose as near to the blood as possible without touching the item, to enable scientists to recover the sample quickly and efficiently. She can even pick out traces of blood after clothing or weapons have been washed many times; when Keela was working on the Abigail Witchalls case, she found eight pieces of blood-stained clothing in just one day.

Claims have been made by the McCanns and their team of legal and PR advisers about the alleged unreliability of cadaver dogs, including suggestions that they have on occasions mistaken pork for cadaver scent. But cadaver dogs have an excellent track record and have been used successfully in several murder trials. They are able to detect the smell of death up to dozens of feet below the surface and even after a body has lain there for years. Spectacular examples of their work can be viewed on many websites on the Internet. In addition, Mr Harrison and Mr Grime, who trained Eddie and Keela, patiently explained that the dogs had traced the ‘smell of death’ - human cadaverine - on around 200 previous occasions. They had never once been wrong.

An article in the Daily Telegraph gave us these details about the dogs:

http://www.cwporter.com/mccann.htm

So what did Mr Martin Grime’s cadaver dog and blood-hound find?

According to the official police summary report released in July this year - and confirmed by video evidence of the dogs in action in Praia da Luz, widely available on the Internet - Eddie, the cadaver dog, found the ‘smell of death’ in the following places. We quote the exact words of the report:

a) in the McCanns’ apartment, Apartment 5A, Eddie the cadaver the dog detected the scent of a human corpse (human cadaverine):

in the couple’s bedroom, in a corner, around a wardrobe, and
in the living room, behind the sofa, close to the external window of the apartment.
Also, a ‘lighter’ scent of death was found in the flower beds in the back yard, near the foot of the steps leading down from the patio.

b) on family items of clothing, Eddie found the scent of a corpse as follows:

on two items of Kate McCann’s clothing, and
on one item of Madeleine’s clothing - a T-shirt.
c) in addition, Eddie the cadaver dog was taken to the house that the McCanns rented, in a different part of Praia da Luz, after they left Apartment 5A. Eddie found cadaverine on what was said to be Madeleine’s favourite pink soft toy, ‘Cuddle Cat’, which Dr Kate McCann always had with her when being interviewed by the media - but which Eddie detected lying in an otherwise empty cupboard. Here it should be noted that, earlier, Eddie had found Cuddle Cat in the living room at the McCanns’ rented home, tossed it in the air, but not actually ‘marked’ it by barking. He later marked it when the police re-located it in the cupboard.

d) on top of all that, Eddie, sniffing the car from the outside only, detected cadaverine in the car the McCanns hired on 22nd May, less than three weeks after Madeleine ‘disappeared’ - a Renault Scenic:

on the car key
around the door of the front driver’s seat.
These findings, supported by other forensic evidence, show that a dead body must have begun to emit cadaverine in Apartment 5A - the McCanns’ apartment. That body must have lain dead in that apartment for at least 90 minutes, probably two hours or more. Once that ‘smell of death’ - cadaverine - had begun to be produced, it could then be transferred to other locations such as the hire car, Madeleine’s clothes, Dr Kate McCann’s clothes and Cuddle Cat.

That means that a corpse - that must have been dead for approximately two hours (in order for cadaverine to have been produced) - must have been in direct contact with all of these locations - floor, wardrobe, car, clothes etc. If the body had subsequently been moved, it would still emit cadaverine as it was decomposing. Meanwhile, Keela, the blood-hound, found the smell of blood - note, blood, not just ‘body fluids’:

a) in the living room, behind the sofa, close to the external window of the apartment (exactly where Eddie had found the scent of human cadaverine), and

b) in the McCanns’ hired Renault Scenic:

on the car key
in the interior of the car boot.
We should note three very important things here. The dogs alerted to the smell of death/blood, separately, in exactly the same places in the apartment. Eddie the cadaver dog only alerted to the smell of death to the McCanns’ apartment, out of all the other ones he was taken to.

Similarly, the McCanns’ car was the only one in the car compound that Eddie alerted to. Let us be very clear about where the dogs’ evidence takes us. Records have been checked by the Portuguese police, going back years. No-one else has ever died in Apartment 5A. No-one else has ever died in the Renault Scenic. There was a dead body in Apartment 5A. There was a dead body in the Renault Scenic hired by the McCanns. That dead body could only be one individual - already dead - who could have been in both Apartment 5A and in the Renault Scenic. It must have been Madeleine McCann.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

I watched the "alert" session.. IT seems to me that the handler could have influenced the dog and it was obvious whose car it was. Again. IT IS A RENTAL!!! So who knows what went on in that car, Who bled, who got hurt, Ripped their skin on a handle.. WHO KNOWS.

You are not correct. Dogs can hit on biological material that is not off a corpse but was off a live body and then decomposed.
It has been linked many times.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Human Remains (*cadaver) Detection (HRD) dog questions and answers **NO DISCUSSION**

An HRD dog WILL alert on human blood.
 
  • #902
I watched the "alert" session.. IT seems to me that the handler could have influenced the dog and it was obvious whose car it was. Again. IT IS A RENTAL!!! So who knows what went on in that car, Who bled, who got hurt, Ripped their skin on a handle.. WHO KNOWS.

You are not correct. Dogs can hit on biological material that is not off a corpse but was off a live body and then decomposed.
It has been linked many times.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Human Remains (*cadaver) Detection (HRD) dog questions and answers **NO DISCUSSION**

An HRD dog WILL alert on human blood.

I suggest you actually READ the link I supplied and research those particular dogs.

You are wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
 
  • #903
I suggest you actually READ the link I supplied and research those particular dogs.

You are wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

I don't think so. I watched the video, I saw the alert, I have been looking at the information on the dogs.

The hit on a rental, A hotel room? It just means nothing.. It could be anything from anyone.
 
  • #904
I don't think so. I watched the video, I saw the alert, I have been looking at the information on the dogs.

The hit on a rental, A hotel room? It just means nothing.. It could be anything from anyone.

Please don't demand links from me then refuse to read them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
 
  • #905
Please don't demand links from me then refuse to read them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

From a site that is all about how the Mccanns are guilty? That is not a link I am interested in. Sorry.

I think it is not just the link but the source that is important. I did not demand a link. I asked for one and not about the dog. About the fact that you knew no one died in that room before.
 
  • #906
I don't think so. I watched the video, I saw the alert, I have been looking at the information on the dogs.

The hit on a rental, A hotel room? It just means nothing.. It could be anything from anyone.

I agree. I get my information about HRD dogs from dog experts not some retired lawyer. Those dog alerts are not proof of anyone being dead let alone Madeleine.
 
  • #907
From a site that is all about how the Mccanns are guilty? That is not a link I am interested in. Sorry.

I think it is not just the link but the source that is important. I did not demand a link. I asked for one and not about the dog. About the fact that you knew no one died in that room before.

The source quoted directly from the police reports.

I also provided you the the factual information no one died in the hotel room or the car.

You're welcome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
 
  • #908
The source quoted directly from the police reports.

I also provided you the the factual information no one died in the hotel room or the car.

You're welcome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

BBM

Where was that? I missed it.
 
  • #909
The source quoted directly from the police reports.

I also provided you the the factual information no one died in the hotel room or the car.

You're welcome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

I don't use that site as a source but even if you do.. It still does not mean there was a dead body in any of those places.

It just doesn't. There are other reasonable explanations.
Madeleine has not been proven dead. She is still alive as far as we know.

Jane saw someone take her away. That is a human telling us what she saw. A dog can not speak. We can have no absolute proof what he alerted on.
 
  • #910
  • #911
Look up ^


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Are you talking about the retired lawyers post about his opinions. I didn't see anything in his post about proof that no one had previously died in the apartment or car. Is there another link?
 
  • #912
Eddie, who has been called ‘the cadaver dog’, can detect the presence of human ‘cadaverine’, a special chemical released from a dead body, usually after the body has been dead for at least two hours (sometimes as short as an hour-and-a-half). It’s important to understand that Eddie is trained only to scent the presence of the special type of cadaverine released by a human corpse. The scent of death from animals is a different form of cadaverine. Keela is a dog trained specifically to detect the presence of blood. She is therefore what is popularly known as a ‘blood-hound’. She has been trained to ignore decomposing body materials other than human blood, freezing with her nose as near to the blood as possible without touching the item, to enable scientists to recover the sample quickly and efficiently. She can even pick out traces of blood after clothing or weapons have been washed many times; when Keela was working on the Abigail Witchalls case, she found eight pieces of blood-stained clothing in just one day.

Claims have been made by the McCanns and their team of legal and PR advisers about the alleged unreliability of cadaver dogs, including suggestions that they have on occasions mistaken pork for cadaver scent. But cadaver dogs have an excellent track record and have been used successfully in several murder trials. They are able to detect the smell of death up to dozens of feet below the surface and even after a body has lain there for years. Spectacular examples of their work can be viewed on many websites on the Internet. In addition, Mr Harrison and Mr Grime, who trained Eddie and Keela, patiently explained that the dogs had traced the ‘smell of death’ - human cadaverine - on around 200 previous occasions. They had never once been wrong.

An article in the Daily Telegraph gave us these details about the dogs:

http://www.cwporter.com/mccann.htm

So what did Mr Martin Grime’s cadaver dog and blood-hound find?

According to the official police summary report released in July this year - and confirmed by video evidence of the dogs in action in Praia da Luz, widely available on the Internet - Eddie, the cadaver dog, found the ‘smell of death’ in the following places. We quote the exact words of the report:

a) in the McCanns’ apartment, Apartment 5A, Eddie the cadaver the dog detected the scent of a human corpse (human cadaverine):

in the couple’s bedroom, in a corner, around a wardrobe, and
in the living room, behind the sofa, close to the external window of the apartment.
Also, a ‘lighter’ scent of death was found in the flower beds in the back yard, near the foot of the steps leading down from the patio.

b) on family items of clothing, Eddie found the scent of a corpse as follows:

on two items of Kate McCann’s clothing, and
on one item of Madeleine’s clothing - a T-shirt.
c) in addition, Eddie the cadaver dog was taken to the house that the McCanns rented, in a different part of Praia da Luz, after they left Apartment 5A. Eddie found cadaverine on what was said to be Madeleine’s favourite pink soft toy, ‘Cuddle Cat’, which Dr Kate McCann always had with her when being interviewed by the media - but which Eddie detected lying in an otherwise empty cupboard. Here it should be noted that, earlier, Eddie had found Cuddle Cat in the living room at the McCanns’ rented home, tossed it in the air, but not actually ‘marked’ it by barking. He later marked it when the police re-located it in the cupboard.

d) on top of all that, Eddie, sniffing the car from the outside only, detected cadaverine in the car the McCanns hired on 22nd May, less than three weeks after Madeleine ‘disappeared’ - a Renault Scenic:

on the car key
around the door of the front driver’s seat.
These findings, supported by other forensic evidence, show that a dead body must have begun to emit cadaverine in Apartment 5A - the McCanns’ apartment. That body must have lain dead in that apartment for at least 90 minutes, probably two hours or more. Once that ‘smell of death’ - cadaverine - had begun to be produced, it could then be transferred to other locations such as the hire car, Madeleine’s clothes, Dr Kate McCann’s clothes and Cuddle Cat.

That means that a corpse - that must have been dead for approximately two hours (in order for cadaverine to have been produced) - must have been in direct contact with all of these locations - floor, wardrobe, car, clothes etc. If the body had subsequently been moved, it would still emit cadaverine as it was decomposing. Meanwhile, Keela, the blood-hound, found the smell of blood - note, blood, not just ‘body fluids’:

a) in the living room, behind the sofa, close to the external window of the apartment (exactly where Eddie had found the scent of human cadaverine), and

b) in the McCanns’ hired Renault Scenic:

on the car key
in the interior of the car boot.
We should note three very important things here. The dogs alerted to the smell of death/blood, separately, in exactly the same places in the apartment. Eddie the cadaver dog only alerted to the smell of death to the McCanns’ apartment, out of all the other ones he was taken to.

Similarly, the McCanns’ car was the only one in the car compound that Eddie alerted to. Let us be very clear about where the dogs’ evidence takes us. Records have been checked by the Portuguese police, going back years. No-one else has ever died in Apartment 5A. No-one else has ever died in the Renault Scenic. There was a dead body in Apartment 5A. There was a dead body in the Renault Scenic hired by the McCanns. That dead body could only be one individual - already dead - who could have been in both Apartment 5A and in the Renault Scenic. It must have been Madeleine McCann.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

You're linking to Tony Bennet? Seriously? Ever read the rebuttal of all the LIES he tells? Here ya go

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/40008980/Background-to-the-Rebuttal-Wiki

This site links to PRIMARY SOURCES for it's information- mostly the police files.

In regards to this case I do not read anything unless it has come from the police files there is too much misinformation out there. The link you have provided is not a credible source it is someone's opinion and littered with error and claims and he provides NO links to the quotes taken from police statements.
 
  • #913
So much hair splitting.

All of this has been gone over and over.

What hasn't occured is a tangible IDI theory.

Folks are so busy defending the McCann's and their woeful parenting, that NO ONE seems to have a logical alternative scenario to present.

The fact remains that if the "abductor" did steal Madeleine, then he walked right past her father to do it.

The same father that was "checking" on her.

:cow:
 
  • #914
So much hair splitting.

All of this has been gone over and over.

What hasn't occured is a tangible IDI theory.

Folks are so busy defending the McCann's and their woeful parenting, that NO ONE seems to have a logical alternative scenario to present.

The fact remains that if the "abductor" did steal Madeleine, then he walked right past her father to do it.

The same father that was "checking" on her.

:cow:

Not hair splitting examining the information to see if it is fact or fiction.

No, it doesn't. It means that he walked past Jane who saw him. IT does not mean that Gerry saw them.

That is just assumption.
 
  • #915
So much hair splitting.

All of this has been gone over and over.

What hasn't occured is a tangible IDI theory.

Folks are so busy defending the McCann's and their woeful parenting, that NO ONE seems to have a logical alternative scenario to present.

The fact remains that if the "abductor" did steal Madeleine, then he walked right past her father to do it.

The same father that was "checking" on her.

:cow:

The theory is someone walked into the apartment, took Madeleine, walked out and took her somewhere and done whatever to her.

What is not tangible about that theory? Kids have been abducted before from their bedrooms, taken in minutes.

How about you provide a theory of what happened?

You've argued on here that The Smiths did see Gerry McCann when he was on his way to dump Madeleine in some roadworks and you've argued on here that the McCanns could have kept Madeleine in a freezer for a month before putting her in the hire car. Which is it? They didn't both happen.

Why is it so unbelievable that an abductor walked close to Gerry with Madeleine in his arms?
 
  • #916
The theory is someone walked into the apartment, took Madeleine, walked out and took her somewhere and done whatever to her.

What is not tangible about that theory? Kids have been abducted before from their bedrooms, taken in minutes.

How about you provide a theory of what happened?

You've argued on here that The Smiths did see Gerry McCann when he was on his way to dump Madeleine in some roadworks and you've argued on here that the McCanns could have kept Madeleine in a freezer for a month before putting her in the hire car. Which is it? They didn't both happen.

Why is it so unbelievable that an abductor walked close to Gerry with Madeleine in his arms?

I thought I had provided a theory....:dunno:

Anyway to address your question -

Because Jeremy Wilkins did not see him either;

Because Tanner's description morphed and changed;

Because of the lies from the McCanns regarding windows and door locks and the checking system which we know was not employed on any other night;

Because to me, the McCanns have attempted to steer the investigation from the very first hour.

I haven't "argued" anything on here, I have "sleuthed" which is supposed to be the point.

I don't know what happened to Madeleine, how (whoever) did what they did, and I'm not alone in that. There is no arrest so even LE can't prove anything for sure apparently. That's what happens when everybody lawyers up and refuses to cooperate with the investigation.

Another great big sign of hink, in my opinion.

:moo: :cow: Again, my opinion only.
 
  • #917
I thought I had provided a theory....:dunno:

Anyway to address your question -

Because Jeremy Wilkins did not see him either;

Because Tanner's description morphed and changed;

Because of the lies from the McCanns regarding windows and door locks and the checking system which we know was not employed on any other night;

Because to me, the McCanns have attempted to steer the investigation from the very first hour.

I haven't "argued" anything on here, I have "sleuthed" which is supposed to be the point.

I don't know what happened to Madeleine, how (whoever) did what they did, and I'm not alone in that. There is no arrest so even LE can't prove anything for sure apparently. That's what happens when everybody lawyers up and refuses to cooperate with the investigation.

Another great big sign of hink, in my opinion.

:moo: :cow: Again, my opinion only.

There are no LIES about the window and such.

The Mccanns being innocent of this horrible crime are not trying to spin but get help to find their missing child.

I believe that a man went in and took that child because SOME ONE ACTUALLY SAW a man caryying a child. Kind of puts it all together.
 
  • #918
I thought I had provided a theory....:dunno:

Anyway to address your question -

Because Jeremy Wilkins did not see him either;

Because Tanner's description morphed and changed;

Because of the lies from the McCanns regarding windows and door locks and the checking system which we know was not employed on any other night;

Because to me, the McCanns have attempted to steer the investigation from the very first hour.

I haven't "argued" anything on here, I have "sleuthed" which is supposed to be the point.

I don't know what happened to Madeleine, how (whoever) did what they did, and I'm not alone in that. There is no arrest so even LE can't prove anything for sure apparently. That's what happens when everybody lawyers up and refuses to cooperate with the investigation.

Another great big sign of hink, in my opinion.

:moo: :cow: Again, my opinion only.

All this case is missing is a ransom note and Mary Lacy!

I'll hand it to the McCanns ... Well played.

All IMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
 
  • #919
I thought I had provided a theory....:dunno:

Anyway to address your question -

Because Jeremy Wilkins did not see him either;

Because Tanner's description morphed and changed;

Because of the lies from the McCanns regarding windows and door locks and the checking system which we know was not employed on any other night;

Because to me, the McCanns have attempted to steer the investigation from the very first hour.

I haven't "argued" anything on here, I have "sleuthed" which is supposed to be the point.

I don't know what happened to Madeleine, how (whoever) did what they did, and I'm not alone in that. There is no arrest so even LE can't prove anything for sure apparently. That's what happens when everybody lawyers up and refuses to cooperate with the investigation.

Another great big sign of hink, in my opinion.

:moo: :cow: Again, my opinion only.



You asked for a theory and I gave one. You are unable to give a theory because anything that points at the McCanns being guilty is believed despite the fact that it contradicts other information. You are unable to dismiss anything that does not support any one of your theories. It makes no sense. What do you actually believe happened?

Why is it so unbelievable that Jerry did not see the abductor?

Jane Tanners statement did not differ hugely in description and there was NO lies about windows and door locks. Their account was consistent. I posted links to the police files only yesterday regarding both of these.
 
  • #920
I thought I had provided a theory....:dunno:

Anyway to address your question -

Because Jeremy Wilkins did not see him either;

Because Tanner's description morphed and changed;

Because of the lies from the McCanns regarding windows and door locks and the checking system which we know was not employed on any other night;

Because to me, the McCanns have attempted to steer the investigation from the very first hour.

I haven't "argued" anything on here, I have "sleuthed" which is supposed to be the point.

I don't know what happened to Madeleine, how (whoever) did what they did, and I'm not alone in that. There is no arrest so even LE can't prove anything for sure apparently. That's what happens when everybody lawyers up and refuses to cooperate with the investigation.

Another great big sign of hink, in my opinion.

:moo: :cow: Again, my opinion only.

And my motto is.... Where there is hink, there is stink!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
131
Guests online
1,622
Total visitors
1,753

Forum statistics

Threads
632,457
Messages
18,627,094
Members
243,162
Latest member
KaseyPlaster
Back
Top