Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue
In the tradition of our “comments continue” posts, having the original post reached 200 comments, this one has
been put up to allow us and our readers to continue to comment on the
case.
Please tell me why my following post of 29 October 17:56 has not appeared on the blog: Taxtusa, T has commented @ 29 October 2019 at 11:02 on what you said. http://cristobell.blogspot.com/2019/09/im-delighted-libdems-have-decided-on.html#comment-form
We believe we published your comment in previous post. We haven’t replied to it and we apologise for it, but as we have mentioned in regards to the Frog/blood/JBLittlemore debate, but life has presented us with priorities that supersede the blog.
We have 3 posts we intend to write and we’re not sure when we will be able to publish.
We think that you mean this:
“Anonymous29 October 2019 at 11:02 Anonymous25 October 2019 at 18:42
Thanks.
Textusa: “Our comment: Disagree. The fact that he [ M Grime T] mentions the possibility…”
What Grime mentions is not a possibility, it is an impossibility. That’s what’s important.
Textusa: “We think T and we agree on what matters: there was no DIFFUSION in that room.”
I don’t know how Textusa arrived at that conclusion, for It is the opposite of what I’d said It’s not a matter of my opinion, it’s physics.
Textusa: “Where Eddie alerted was where the source of the scent was…”
I have no doubt that’s what happened. There must have been a ‘source’ where he alerted. Why the ‘source’ happened to be where it was is another matter.
Textusa: “…we are talking about a strong scent.”
Yes, in the sense that it was strong enough for Eddie to alert. A great dog he was, bless him.
T”
*****
We can but ask if T is saying that this is a physics impossibility?
JBLIttlemore has finally replied to our challenge about his veiled accusation that we had said in the blog that he was Lowe:
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190349035426779138 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore Replying to @strackers74 @CarlaSpade Ye gods! I'm not John Lowe. I'm not in any gang - insisting I am shows Carla's frail grasp on facts/reality. I didn't say Textusa said .. I said I recalled the Lowe connection emanated from Textusa's fold (as in 'Welcome to the fold' ie group, like minded - Whispering?) #Mccann 7:25 PM - 1 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190350172804567040 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore Replying to @strackers74 @CarlaSpade Also grateful if Carla drops the attacks and accusations I am lying. There was no calling out needed by you. I am just me, my own person, here for my own reason, not connected to or in/on any group/gang/page etc., and not willing or really able to be. 7:29 PM - 1 Nov 2019
So, according to himself, JBLittlemore is not part of the gang. Just takes digs against us for the pure pleasure it gives him.
Then there’s this lovely exchange between these 2 non-members of the gang:
https://twitter.com/The_Truth_II/status/1189581373079805952 The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II Replying to @JBLittlemore the blog which many once read with interest has lost all its credibility & descended into a catalogue of abusing anybody & every body #puredrivel #curseoftrotters74 4:34 PM - 30 Oct 2019
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1189629994278047744 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore Replying to @The_Truth_II It is sad. There was some good research on there I found, whether verifiably correct or not. It was interesting & thought provoking. No more. It is just a well of bitterness & a mountain of demeaning abuse against anyone who doesn't agree with him. 7:47 PM - 30 Oct 2019
*****
We have been discussing the dogs and the blood. Evidently thinks that discussing it is not interesting or thought provoking. He was surprised we were still discussing it.
As a side-note, unless JBLIttlemore finds discussing the dogs and blood as a ”well of bitterness & a mountain of demeaning abuse against anyone who doesn't agree with him” then we haven’t exactly been that well.
And talking about the dogs and blood and wishing to be thought provoking, we wish to ask JBLittlemore a few questions.
We will give 4 examples of bloods. To each we would like to know JBLittlemore’s opinion about whether Keela and Eddie would or not alert to each. And he tell us briefly the reasons he thinks they would or would not.
Blood A: my blood, cut myself yesterday and let a drop fall on the floor, where it has been left exposed to the elements for the last 24 hours, decomposing.
Blood B: from a corpse on a crime scene, the murder happened 2 to 3 hours ago and when the police picked up the body to remove it from the scene, some blood dropped off the body and fell on the floor.
Blood C: blood B but 24 hours later. To be precise, blood that was inside a cadaver 2 to 3 hours after death, dripped off it and it has been left exposed to the elements for the last 24 hours, decomposing.
Blood D: during the autopsy, 2 days after death, some blood dripped on the floor when removing an internal organ. To be precise, blood that has decomposed together with the body for 48hours.
So JBlitlemore, for each one of the bloods above, would Eddie alert? Yes or no? If yes, why? If not, why?
Same thing for Keela.
Hope these questions are sufficiently thought provoking for you. We will be waiting for your response.
And to keep things fair, we will answer the questions ourselves. Not doing it now so as not to influence your answers.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1190421515155709953 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @JBLittlemore @strackers74 @CarlaSpade Tex has left some questions for you on their blog...the dastardly scoundrels are trying to trip you up. ☹ 12:13 AM - 2 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190454663235198977 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore Replying to @FragrantFrog @strackers74 @CarlaSpade I just looked. I did not answer any challenge by the self obsessed soul as he suggests - I dealt with Carla's sniping tweets to Elaine by way of my reply. As to his blood questions - I'll wait for his answers, wearing only a smile in readiness! Good night. 2:24 AM - 2 Nov 2019
*****
As predictable as Big Ben, JBLittlemore hides in the bushes. It seems he prefers to “gossip” than to discuss relevant issues to the case.
And why are we dastardly scoundrels? Weren’t the questions completely and absolutely objective?
We looked for all possible examples and we even took into account JBLittlemore’s “blood also remains sterile for many hours within corpse - not 'afflicted' by decomp components in that time”.
Blood A – shed by a living human being, in no way 'afflicted' by decomp components and having decomposed on its own;
Blood B – freshly shed by a cadaver but not 'afflicted' by decomp components whilst inside the body; Blood C – shed by a cadaver but not 'afflicted' by decomp components whilst inside the body and having decomposed on its own outside.
Blood D – shed by a cadaver and 'afflicted' by decomp components whilst inside the body.
Isn’t it important to know JBLittlemore’s opinion about how the dogs would react to each case? We think it is and we will provide our answers. If until then JBLittlemore doesn’t answer – as is his right – we will do so in a post.
In fact, we now see that there are 2 more possibilities that we have missed and that is between Blood A and Blood B. Both possibilities are of blood being shed by a recently deceased cadaver. We shall call them Blood A1 and Blood A2,
Blood A1 – freshly shed by a recently deceased cadaver (post mortem less than an hour), so not 'afflicted' by decomp components whilst inside the body;
Blood A2 – shed by a recently deceased cadaver (post mortem less than an hour), so not 'afflicted' by decomp components whilst inside the body but decomposed on its own outside.
We think with this 6 examples we have covered all possibilities. We would like to know what our critics believe each one of the dogs would react in each one of the cases.
Where on earth is this being dastardly or trying to trip anyone up? We don’t think we could be more transparent or objective.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190654064201273344 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore FollowFollow @JBLittlemore More #Mccann 1/2 Some brief but interesting information on 'cadaver dogs' detecting blood - https://www.staffs.ac.uk/assets/Simon%20Newbery_tcm44-19866.pdf 3:37 PM - 2 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190654553508761600 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore #Mccann 2/2 And more information (read to the bottom) relating to dogs detecting blood through stages of its degradation - https://www.staffs.ac.uk/assets/Simon%20Newbery_tcm44-19866.pdf I will not engage in the petty game playing of Textusa & his challenges. 3:39 PM - 2 Nov 2019
Transcription of the document submitted by JBLittlemore:
A STUDY OF THE USE OF CADAVER DOGS FOR BLOOD SCENT DETECTION IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS Newbery Simon and Dr J.P. Cassella Department of Forensic Science, Faculty of Science, Staffordshire University,
Introduction Blood is one of the most important and often encountered types of physical evidence linked with the forensic investigation of death and violent crime Anecdotal evidence has suggested that dogs are capable of detecting and alerting to human blood. This evidence may be presented to a court of law in order to substantiate or corroborate further forensic evidence against a suspect or suspects of a crime. The main job of cadaver detection dogs (sometimes referred to as cadaver dogs or human remains detection HRD dogs or body dogs or more accurately Victim Remains Detection Dogs) is to search for hidden or buried human bodies or body parts, however more recently, a new aspect of cadaver detection work has been used in criminal investigations in which dogs are deployed to search for blood that has been in an area or on an object for various lengths of time and is in various stages of decomposition. A frequent problem in a murder investigation is the location and identification of objects, weapons and places associated with either the commission of the incident or the actual location of a victim's body. Dogs showing the capacity to detect human blood scent effectively and reliably can be used as an inexpensive screening test to assist the police in their investigations when looking for a weapon used in a crime for example or recovery of victims or perpetrators blood for DNA analysis or pin pointing crime scenes for the SOCO’s to focus upon.
Discussion This project demonstrated the reliability of the dogs and the purposes to which they can be utilised in an ongoing investigation where detection of blood may be important. This project explored different scenarios in which the dogs may be utilised and showed that they can be reliably used indoor and outdoors and detect blood on a variety of surfaces and under different circumstances. In this project two handlers from South Yorkshire police dog unit were used along with their licenced and certified cadaver dogs. The findings showed that an experienced forensic search dog can detect blood that is day old through to months old. Dog 1 was a male Border collie and had been working for 7 years and dog 2 a male Springer spaniel aged had only few weeks experience. The two dogs, one novice and one veteran, used for victim remains detection, were used to detect small amounts of human blood on various surfaces; the lowest detectable amount of used in this study was 0.01ml of blood. The dogs were used in a line up and real life scenarios. Results indicated that the dogs can detect and alert to very small amounts of blood on different surfaces under various conditions. The data suggests that the potential error rate of both dogs and handlers were low and can be used in criminal cases to help other branches of forensic investigators to recover biological evidence. With an overall successful positive diagnostic ratio of id of blood scent of 17.5 for Frankie and a positive diagnostic ratio of 7.6 for Buster and with negative ratios of 38.5 and 16.4 respectively, it is clear that certain dogs have the ability to detect human blood scent in principal in both trial and scenario training. Any conclusions must be drawn carefully as by the nature of this project there were many limitations mainly due to lack of number of dogs to compare and the limitations of number of trials that could be done at any one time and within the overall time frame of this project.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190699531618471937 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore J B Littlemore Retweeted J B Littlemore Apologies - wrong link in the previous tweet. This one – https://phys.org/news/2017-08-sniffing-crime-persons-science-blood-detection.html - this is the one to read to the bottom relating to blood detection by the dogs through its stages of degradation. #Mccann J B Littlemore added, https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190654553508761600 6:37 PM - 2 Nov 2019
From the pdf document submitted by JBLittlemore, there are 2 tables we think we should bring over to the blog:
Table #1: Materials and Methods
Team: Buster Handler: PC Simone Thompson SYP Handler Experience: Least experienced Breed: Springer Spaniel Sex: Male Age: 2 Previous Training: Cadaver Deployments: Few
Team: Frankie Handler: PS John Ellis SYP Handler Experience: Many years Breed: Border Collie Sex: Male Age: 7 Previous Training: Cadaver & blood Deployments: Many over last 7 years
*****
Table #2: Summary of results for square tests Team: Frankie/John Total trials: 3 Blood correctly identified: 3 Misses: 0 False positives: 0 Comments: 2 of these search areas contained articles with blood and one with blood on ground
Team: Buster/Simone Total trials: 14 Blood correctly identified: 12 Misses: 1 False positives: 1 Comments: 2 of these searches were for blood on the ground rest were for blood on articles
*****
At bottom of page:
West Yorkshire Police FIRN Midlands Regional Student Forensic Science Conference 2008 Staffordshire University
For sniffing out crime and missing persons, science backs blood-detection dogs by Latara Rust And Shari Forbes, The Conversation
Picture: https://scx1.b-cdn.net/csz/news/800/2017/forsniffingo.jpg Caption: Dogs can reliably sniff out human blood, even after two years of environmental degradation. Credit: Jason Korbol/shutterstock
It's difficult to contemplate the tragedy of losing a loved one and never knowing what happened to them.
Every year, an estimated 38,000 people go missing in Australia. While almost 95% of these individuals are found relatively quickly, 5% become long-term missing persons cases, with many suspected victims of foul play.
British toddler Madeleine McCann disappeared in 2007 on a family holiday in Portugal, and has never been found. Sniffer dogs in this case initially assisted in locating blood samples found in the holiday home.
However, the use of canines has attracted controversy due to misunderstandings about the sensitivity of dogs to reliably find evidence through scent at a crime scene.
But our recent research shows that for sniffing out blood, dogs are one of the best investigative screening tools for expediting crime scene searches.
Blood is important evidence
Locating blood at a crime scene is a vital step. It can assist in recreating the events of a crime, identifying victims or suspects, establishing secondary crime scenes, ascertaining potential murder weapons, and in identifying links between individuals with locations and objects.
The police employ various testing methods when processing a crime scene for blood evidence. Colour and chemical change tests are applied to indicate the possible presence of blood. A common example is luminol, which emits a bright blue colour when it reacts with haemoglobin (a molecule found in blood).
If positive results are achieved, areas of interest are then targeted for further processing with more specific tests to confirm the presence of human blood.
But the smell of blood can also be used to locate it at crime scenes. In recent years, several law enforcement agencies in Europe and Australia have introduced blood-detection dogs, which are trained specifically for blood evidence.
Picture: https://scx2.b-cdn.net/gfx/news/2017/1-forsniffingo.jpg Caption: Luminol creates a blue glow when it reacts with haemoglobin, one of the molecules found in blood. Credit: Couperfield/shutterstock
By using this distinct dog unit, a large search area can be screened as a potential crime scene in cases of assault, missing persons, mass disasters or suspected homicides where a body may not be present.
Blood-detection dogs are a recently specialised unit under a broader grouping of scent-detection dogs used by law enforcement. The dogs' highly sensitive sense of smell can locate a range of target odours including drugs, explosives, human bodies (known as "cadavers") and now blood.
Forensic odour profiling aims to unravel the chemical components of odour. Our research in this area focuses on the individual odour-producing constituents of blood, and explore how environmental changes can affect the ability of blood-detection dogs to detect these.
A scientific analysis of scent involves collecting the gases emitted from blood samples, and then separating the gaseous odour molecules (known as volatile organic compounds) to be individually detected and identified at trace levels.
Often searches are carried out a considerable time after the crime occurred. So in our first studies we compared the odour of fresh and degraded blood, chemically profiled over a two-year study and presented to cadaver-detection and blood-detection dogs in training. Degraded blood is defined as blood which has undergone decomposition through the breakdown of cellular material.
Preliminary results indicate that a distinct odour change occurs from blood collected within 48 hours to degraded, with the odour profile changing throughout the degradation process. Impressively, the canines which were mostly trained on fresh blood could locate blood confidently up to six months old, and had the ability to locate blood even as old as 24 months.
We've also established through this research that the surface on which the blood is deposited affects the odour produced by the blood. Blood left on porous surfaces (such as clothing) and blood on non-porous surfaces (such as metallic objects) produce unique odour profile patterns which are most apparent when the blood is freshly deposited.
It's important that blood-detection dogs are trained to reliably locate blood on any type of crime scene surface they could potentially encounter on the job.
https://youtu.be/3psY6GY-_ic Caption: The Australian Facility For Taphonomic Experimental Research (AFTER) examines how bodies decompose under Australian conditions.
Blood is blood
A comparison of blood donors has also expanded our understanding of what human blood actually smells like: we refer to this as the "core odour profile of blood". Although much of the odour profile is consistent from individual to individual, some variations do occur linked with differing lifestyle, diet, health and other factors in the environment.
However, early results suggests this may have little effect on the canine's ability to locate fresh and degraded blood from different people.
We also compared the sensitivity of detecting latent blood – that is, blood that is invisible to the naked eye – by dogs as compared to other methods such as luminol.
We created an artificial scenario in which a suspect attempted to remove a victim's blood from clothing by washing it five times. Initial results indicate that the blood-detection and cadaver-detection dogs are much more sensitive than our current analytical detection approaches, but complementary to the use of luminol.
What happens to bodies after death
Our research into blood-detection by dogs is part of a broader program in forensic odour profiling and the science of body decomposition.
The first Australian Facility for Taphonomic Experimental Research (or AFTER) is now established. Collaborating with 13 partner organisations, ongoing research at this facility strengthens our understanding of how the human body decomposes, and ultimately will assist investigators in the search for human remains.
By investigating the odour profile of common training aids utilised by law enforcement we can provide important recommendations for the training of blood-detection and cadaver-detection dogs to ensure their success in the field.
Establishing a connection between science and law enforcement, we work hand in paw to provide justice for victims and bring closure for their families.
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
So blood on a knife...would you class that as "dead person blood" or "blood from a living person"?
(Censored)
(Censored)
(Censored)
(Censored)
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 3 Nov 2019, 02:50:00”
*****
It depends.
If, when the knife was introduced in the victim’s body the victim was alive or very recently deceased, it would be blood from a living person as it wasn’t yet 'afflicted' by decomp components.
If, when the knife was introduced in the body any time after 1.5 to 2 hours after death, it would be blood of a dead person because it had been 'afflicted' by decomp components, direct or indirectly.
If, this introduction was done before approximately 6 hours post-mortem, then this ‘affliction’ would be indirect, as although the blood remained sterile within corpse, on the way out ‘attached’ to the blade, it would come in contact with tissues of the body already ‘afflicted’ by decomp components, becoming contaminated.
If, this introduction was done after that time, then the ‘affliction’ by decomp components would be direct.
For the love of God, stop with this train crash. This blog is without doubt the biggest shower of shit I have ever seen. It's badly written, badly constructed, factually incorrect, and it shows you have several personality disorders that cause you to act in an abnormal way.
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191102243484946432 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others Oh dear. It is not 'live blood' Grime says 'blood from a live human being'. As soon as blood leaves the body it starts to decay. So there is no 'live blood' vs 'dead blood'....just blood. #mccann 9:17 PM - 3 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1190263950404927490 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others Why do you continue to lie? Cadaver dogs are trained to indicate THE SCENT OF DEATH - not an individual amine and scientists NEVER said anything about individual amines in your source. You obviously know very little - can't even get right what's in your own sources. ๐ฌ#McCann 1:46 PM - 1 Nov 2019
*****
To CruftMs
‘Live blood’ is blood uncontaminated with the scent of death.
‘Dead blood’ is blood contaminated with the scent of death.
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191107446128939008 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @BourgeoisViews @Esjabe1 and 4 others This is really simple. ( not that you will be satisfied). EVRD dogs alert to blood AND corpses. If the EVRD dog alerts in the same place as the blood dog there was blood AND a body. Get it? ( I doubt it somehow ) 9:38 PM - 3 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1191139223480479744 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @CruftMs @BourgeoisViews and 4 others You're wrong. The VRD would alert to dried blood from a living human. 11:44 PM - 3 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Dex________x/status/1191140996563820544 Dex @Dex________x FollowFollow @Dex________x More Replying to @FragrantFrog @CruftMs and 5 others What’s the difference between dried blood from a dead person and dried blood from a live person ? > 11:51 PM - 3 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1191141801022898176 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @Dex________x @CruftMs and 5 others To a dog trained on uncontaminated dried blood - nothing. 11:55 PM - 3 Nov 2019
*****
Slowly we are getting there. So, to the Frog there is a training for contaminated blood and a training for uncontaminated blood.
Eddie was trained with contaminated blood, only reacts to that blood.
Keela was trained to blood in all its stages of decomposition, so can’t tell the difference between dead blood or live blood, as for her the scent of death the blood may or not contain, she ignores like she ignores all other scents.
Nobody has commented on the experiment with the blood from accident victims. If blood odour was the same from living or dead, what was the point of this experiment?
In JBLittmore’s pdf above, one dog, Buster, is said to have been previously trained in CADAVER while the other, Frankie, is said to have been in CADAVER & BLOOD.
This would mean that a cadaver and blood are separate trainings. And that a cadaver dog would only alert to blood if trained specifically for that effect.
However the pdf says that Buster alerted to blood. How is that possible?
Buster had 14 trials. 2 were blood on the ground, with the rest being blood on articles. There was 1 miss and 1 false alert. We don’t know if the latter related to the 2 tests for blood on the ground or not. Blood on the ground presumably wasn’t cadaver blood, but blood used for testing? Was the blood on ARTICLES related to cadavers or not? Without knowing the precise details of Buster’s alerts to blood, it’s only a possibility that Buster was alerting to cadaver odour on the articles.
If he alerted in all 12 situations and to ‘live’ blood, the question is why, if his training was as a cadaver dog, as opposed to Frankie, who was trained for both blood and cadaver.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1191324411418288129 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore Replying to @CruftMs @Esjabe1 and 4 others There is, of course, the consideration that when Eddie was trained, the only blood permitted to be used was dried blood from live patient samples at Sheffield Haem dept.? No deceased body parts permitted for training in UK. #Mccann 12:00 PM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
JBLitllemore has now become the latest one who doesn’t trust the judgement of the British accreditation authorities.
“No deceased body parts permitted for training in UK” is absolutely true but that’s because the British accreditation authorities have deemed that uneviscerated piglet remains are the equivalent of “deceased body parts”.
So, using uneviscerated piglet remains, including blood, is the same, according to the British accreditation authorities as using human remains. Disagree? Take it up with the respective authorities.
The fact that “No deceased body parts permitted for training in UK” does not rule out that there are no certified EVR dogs in the UK. They are certified with uneviscerated piglet remains.
But wait a minute… if the EVR dog is trained with living human blood, as JBLIttlemore says they are, then why condition the EVR’s blood training to some rule set out to forbid the use of “deceased body part”? JBLittlemore just had to say that Eddie was trained with the same blood obtained from the same “Haem dept.” the blood to train Keela was obtained from, no?
Yet, JBLittlemore conditions the origins of the blood for Eddie’s training to that rule. Why this inconsistency?
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1191329060540030976 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx @JBLittlemore and 5 others I sense Tex's next move will be to claim Grime mixed the uncontaminated "fresh" blood with decomposing piglet parts....it's not over yet. ๐คฃ๐คฃ 12:19 PM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
Next move?
Frog, do pay attention and please make an effort to keep up with the rest of the class.
The only logical conclusion, if one believes Eddie alerts to blood from a living person, ( as Frog, JBL and others maintain) is that alerts by both dogs can only prove that any blood found was from a living person and that is what was found in the living room and in the car. In terms of internal locations, that leaves the closet as the only place where Eddie alerted and Keela didn’t. What explanations have been given so far? The contaminated soil and drifting odour solution. Eddie made a false alerts to please his handler. Eddie’s alerts to blood from the living has made it so much easier for Mc defenders, hasn’t it?
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1190957173540577280 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others No I don't know what you mean. Martin Grimes dogs are not trained to find 'live blood'...so what you are waffling on about is wrong...obviously that's why you need to resort to toddler level and start the name calling. Sad! #mccann #McCann https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIchLsTWkAA3PAQ.png 11:41 AM - 3 Nov 2019
[The picture attached is a screengrab of the famous paragraph of the translation of the translation as per McCannPJFiles. Our caps to highlight what CruftMs has highlighted in it: “'The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver' The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. THE DOG WILL RECOGNIZE ALL OR PARTS OF A HUMAN CADAVER. HE IS NOT TRAINED FOR 'LIVE' HUMAN ODOURS; NO TRAINED DOG WILL RECOGNIZE THE SMELL OF 'FRESH BLOOD'. THEY FIND, HOWEVER, AND GIVE THE ALERT FOR DRIED BLOOD FROM A LIVE HUMAN BEING.”]
You are only supposed to highlight “they find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being” and NOT the phrase “THE DOG WILL RECOGNIZE ALL OR PARTS OF A HUMAN CADAVER. HE IS NOT TRAINED FOR 'LIVE' HUMAN ODOURS; NO TRAINED DOG WILL RECOGNIZE THE SMELL OF 'FRESH BLOOD'”.
The first part was the question posed by the PJ and should therefore have a ? mark to denote it was a question put to Grime and not a statement of fact. Grime then responds.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1191471136917348354 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @DaniellSimone @CruftMs and 4 others There's a 1 in 20 chance the dogs were wrong on every alert. Russian Roulette with a little girl's fate & her parents' destiny. 9:43 PM - 4 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191471876301885441 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @FragrantFrog @DaniellSimone and 4 others Why 1 in 20? 9:46 PM - 4 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1191474307903508480 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @CruftMs @DaniellSimone and 4 others 5 times out of 100 they are wrong. 9:56 PM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
Do readers remember the conversation between the Rat and the Frog where they tried to instil doubt on the dogs’ reliability by using specious and unclear statistics?
Well, we have warned that it would be used against the dogs…
Oh, and talking about the Rat, guess who loved the Rat?
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1164444789170987013 00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx Replying to @LoverandomIeigh @_Babalou_ and 12 others The Rat was brilliant.. I loved the Rat.. ๐ But then so did Snips, in a more creepy way.. 8:50 AM - 22 Aug 2019
To be clear and to sum up what we have learned from JBLittlemore and the Frog:
JBLittlemore says that there are a few hours post-mortem that the blood inside the corpse is not afflicted by decomp components. That means, according to JBLIttlemore, that after those hours, it is.
Martin Grime, we suppose knows that a cadaver has, after a few hours, blood that is afflicted by decomp components or as the Frog calls it, contaminated blood.
But because in the UK no deceased body parts permitted for training, Grime decides to train the EVR dog ‘live’ blood, or blood not afflicted by decomp components and then allows for the world to call Eddie a cadaver dog.
And says nothing about Eddie being also a blood dog on Netflix this year.
Apparently, Grime uses the same ‘live’ blood that he uses to train Keela. This means that at the end of the training he has 2 dogs with one exact same skillset.
He has Keela to detect blood, so has no reason to train Eddie with ‘live’ blood but does it anyway. Just for fun. Or maybe it’s for those days when Keela calls in sick and doesn’t come into the office, Eddie can do her job.
To add to the confusion – Grime must be really a prankster – he trains Eddie to give the exact same alert to 2 different scents: blood and cadaver. Why make things easy and train the dog to give different alerts to different substances? Nah, that would be too easy and too straightforward!
And then, he is careful to explain from where he gets the blood to train Keela but forgets to say that he uses it for Eddie as well.
Grime is also very careful to inform the possibility that there could have been a concentration of scent in the parents’ bedroom but not ONCE does he raise the possibility that any of the double alerts (location alerted by both Eddie & Keela) could just be blood. Not on video nor on his written report.
Only in a rogatory, of which we have an only translated version, does he say something to which our critics hold on to dear life. Only that sentence matters. Only that sentence is law (not even the one preceding it in the same translation should be taken into account) and nothing else or reality matters.
By the way, have you people figured by now the conundrum you’ve dug yourselves into?
Could you tell me how old Eddie was in 2007 and how old Keela was?
Could you also tell me how Eddie would alert to a concealed murder weapon such as a knife used to stab someone?
According to you, Eddie only alerts to blood from a dead person. In the files it can be seem quite clearly that Eddie alerted to a car key that had Gerry McCann's dried blood on it. Could you tell me when Gerry was brought back from the dead please?
You won't have the guts to publish this because you cannot answer without A. Lying about the facts, or B. Proving yourself to be wrong AND having lied about the facts.
Guts? What has guts to do with publishing a pathetic WUI comment (WUI – Written Under the Influence)?
At most, one could eventually feel commiseration for you, one could feel sorry for you and hesitate on whether to publish your cringeworthy comment because it does really embarrass you and the rest gang beyond what you usually embarrass yourself and them. That is saying quite lot.
Since one does not feel sorry for walking Belascos, not for a second did we hesitate in publishing your comment.
Let’s then deal with the questions in your comments.
What has the age of the dogs have to do with anything? Seriously?
Are you implying that Martin Grime brought in underaged dogs to Luz? Really? Whatever substance you introduce in your body is really starting to affect and afflict (our new favourite word) you.
But for your information, Eddie was 7 and Keela 3, according to Grime in his report. Keela was actually 8 weeks old in June 2004, according to South Yorkshire Police.
A perfectly irrelevant piece of information but there you have it. Will be curious on what you are going to make of it. I have a fiver against the team that you are going to do nothing.
About the idiotic knife. What concealed weapon, what concealed knife are you talking about? What has a knife to do with the case? Don’t you have any sense of self-awareness that you can’t see how ridiculous you sound?
If you are implying that a cadaver dog is trained to detect ALL concealed knives in crimes, you haven’t the faintest idea of what you are talking about.
Unless a stabbing crime was being staged, meaning a body is stabbed 2 or 3 hours post-mortem to throw the police off the real cause of death, the blood on the knife would not be contaminated contaminated by cadaver odour.
As the most likely scenario is that the knife removed immediately from the body at the time of stabbing, then the blood would not be contaminated.
The cadaver dogs are trained to find cadavers or traces of cadaver. Where the cadavers were or where they are concealed.
This is done by alerting to surfaces objects/surfaces the cadavers came in contact with after being moved around as… cadavers.
If a person is killed in a living-room, sheds blood there, and then is immediately or very soon taken from there to the bedroom then the EVR dog will not alert in the living-room. The body has not had the time to develop the decomp components (another favourite expression of ours) so nothing there is contaminated, so nothing there for the EVR dog to alert.
The person was killed there but no vestiges for the dog to alert to, so he doesn’t.
In the Maddie case, we only know she was in the living-room because she laid there for enough time for the decomp components (the scent of which is what Eddie alerts to) to contaminate, or afflict the floor surface and/or blood that the body came in contact with after that period of time.
If they had removed the body shortly after death, we would have never known that she had ever been there. And Keela would not alert either. Nothing to do with her capabilities but with the fact that Eddie would not have alerted.
If there was no reason to find that corner of the living-room suspicious, Keela would not have been taken to that location. Keela is taken to where Eddie alerts and as Eddie would not have alerted, no reason to take Keela there.
To answer directly your question: if the knife served to kill the victim, meaning no decomp components present on the blade, then Eddie would not alert to that knife.
Keela would if shown the knife as it contained human blood, Eddie wouldn’t because it didn’t contain decomp components.
But the usefulness of this knife comment is that it shows very clear who wrote this pathetic WUI comment.
It follows the comment we censored at 3 Nov 2019, 18:43:00, where the same reader asked a question about the knife: “So blood on a knife...would you class that as "dead person blood" or "blood from a living person"?”
We censored so much of that comment that we were asked by quite a few people in what way what we had censored was related to the knife question.
We take the opportunity to explain to all our readers that what we censored is in nothing related to the knife question or to the case, otherwise we would have left those bits for the readers to read.
What was censored was the usual personal abuse Mr Thompson likes to submit and has been doing consistently these days.
The question to retain here this is the perfect example of how it shows how much Mr Thompson likes to hear the sound of his own voice.
He submits an idiotic question in the hope that by using a stabbing he demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt why Eddie would be trained for ‘live’ blood.
The question is indeed pathetic because if ‘live’ blood is what is in question, then that’s what Keela is trained for. With the knife he demonstrates absolutely nothing because we would still have a duplication of canine resources and the point is that those defending Eddie is a blood dog cannot explain the reason for this duplication.
We won’t even go into debating whether the victim ends up dying, because if there’s no death there’s no cadaver but it shows that because he thinks it’s a brilliant example, he assumes the rest of the world sees it like he does, that it is indeed brilliant, and so feels compelled to persist in that assumed brilliance to mesmerise the world.
We’ve called it previously the “Clover Effect”, whereby Mr Thompson holds a clover and thinks he’s holding the Amazon and will proceed to debate as if that is FACT before the puzzled look in everybody’s face – with the exception of the gang who will clap gleefully like seals begging for sardines in some zoo marine show, reinforcing his delusion.
He thinks he’s brilliant, that gang tells him he’s brilliant so the rest of the world MUST think he’s brilliant. As the world doesn’t, he gets angry and writes WUI comments like this one.
And this rage blinds him. He even forgets he has recently asked questions and so asks them again.
To save time, we’ll just copy and paste the question and the subsequent conversation:
In our post “Blood and the EVR dog – Part 6” https://textusa.blogspot.com/2019/09/blood-and-evr-dog-part-6.html
Anonymous1 Oct 2019, 21:45:00 Was Gerry dead when he bled onto the car key that Eddie alerted to?
***** Textusa1 Oct 2019, 21:55:00 Anonymous 1 Oct 2019, 21:45:00, No. First, you have to believe in what the FSS has said when it said that it was Gerry's blood. If it was indeed Gerry's blood, then Eddie did not alert to that. Eddie alerted to what he was trained for, cadaver scent.
***** Anonymous7 Oct 2019, 02:15:00 So just to be absolutely clear, you are accusing the FSS, and in particular the person whose name is attached to the report that states the cellular material on the key fob belonged to Gerry McCann, of lying to help cover up the death of Madeleine McCann? Don'tbe a coward now, Mario. Let's see you at and by what you believe (or don't, as the case may be)
Textusa9 Oct 2019, 10:40:00 Anonymous 7 Oct 2019, 02:15:00, About the FSS and it saying to whom the biological samples from this case belonged to: http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/08/super-kid.html http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/10/remarkable-marksmanship.html http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/11/dna-bar-code_1.html You’re welcome. About being a coward, when are expecting to return to Twitter? (as if you have really abandoned it, just scared to tweet under your own name…) It’s now becoming boring watching Jules announcing duds. First it was the BRT pics that were going to get the blog owned. Nada. Niente. Zilch. Now it was her announcing that you were going to making a bombastic come-back on Twitter, as if you were the second coming of Christ there. Up to today nada. Niente. Zilch. One thing that must be said about you is that you are consistent in making your friends look really bad.
*****
He goes and asks the same thing again, Pathetic.
As both dogs reacted to the key fob, then it could be the same as their alerts in the living room and car, Keela was alerting to blood from Gerry and Eddie to cadaver odour deposited after handling a cadaver.
In the apartment, the blood detected by Keela could have been from a living or a dead Maddie but Eddie alerted to cadaver odour in the same area.
And about it being Gerry’s, we recommend that Mr Thompson scrolls to key card and Gerry (page 2653) https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm
A low-level incomplete DNA profile which matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Gerry McCann.
The sample wasn’t sent for further testing using LCN DNA profiling tests. It doesn’t say how many matching components.
But as Mr Thompson has said in his head that it belongs to Gerry, then it belongs to Gerry and whoever dares contradict him will see the wrath of his fury, a tactic that has worked for years but unfortunately for Mr Thompson, the time for such tactics has passed.
Which explanation would you prefer? From JBLittlemore or from the Frog?
Tell you what, will give you both. From JBLIttlemore:
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1188799737241264128 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore Replying to @FragrantFrog EVRD same - dried blood from live humans. Use of cadaver components in UK not permitted. Blood also remains sterile for many hours within corpse - not 'afflicted' by decomp components in that time. So assuming Textusa still arguing the point? 5:48 AM - 28 Oct 2019
Means there is blood not 'afflicted' by decomp components and blood that is 'afflicted' by decomp components.
We call the blood not 'afflicted' by decomp components as live blood and the blood that is 'afflicted' by decomp components as dead blood.
Now by the Frog:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1143979265286914049 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2 I know that. You know that. But as neither dog can be trained on blood from a human cadaver in the UK, what's the point of Keela? The CSI dog has to be trained to ignore any odour from surfaces, textiles etc....so would Keela alert to cadaver contaminated blood? 9:28 PM - 26 Jun 2019
Means there is blood that is not cadaver contaminated and blood that is cadaver contaminated.
We call the blood that is not cadaver contaminated as live blood and the blood that is cadaver contaminated as dead blood.
Not sure if JBLittlemore and the Frog will enjoy you laughing at them but that’s between you and them.
After realising Jim Gamble made an empty threat, Ponce goes political and mentions the RUC, and tops it off with one of her signature sexual references by calling him 'nipples'. Having been alerted to this car crash, Ben Thompson's other impersonator @turaffetamer pops up to fan the flames with one of his pot and kettle comments about stalking women. How much longer Jim Gamble will carry on making empty threats about suing people is anyone's guess, but this may not end up in as big a public display as the gang thinks it will. If he proceeds with a good lawyer, the gang and those supporting them could find themselves gagged from discussing the matter online until it concludes, and possibly end up in a similar position to Karen Lowe Saunders and Karen Ormiston where they are not allowed to mention the matter in public ever again. It is noted none of Ponce's Irish journalist contacts are rushing to her aid to 'plaster' social media with her non story yet. If she wants to use journalists, she should set them in motion before any gagging order is put in place. Contempt of court can be painful. In support of his case, Jim Gamble would also be within his rights to produce years of evidence pertaining to Ponce's own threatening behaviour and malicious communications towards women and men. Her contributions to twitter, laidbare and Pillory blogs being prime examples of her sick mind.
BCS Northern Ireland @BCS_NI · Mar 7 1 week to go until our event with @JimGamble_INEQE on "Why #safeguarding should be a pillar in the #IT profession". A must-attend event for IT professionals in N.I. Register NOW: https://eventbrite.co.uk/e/northern-ireland-ethics-in-it-why-safeguarding-should-be-a-pillar-in-our-profession-registration-53006233070?aff=erelexpmlt @belfasthourNI
@QCSQUB
@CAS_NI @SyncNIevent @BigDataBelfast
@Womenintech_bfs Emma Wilson @EmmaJJW · Mar 8 Will Mr /gamble be talking about how he cheered on the doxing and harassment of a pensioner at the behest of Gerald McCann until she took her life? #McCann #McCanns Madeleine CaseTweets�� @McCannCaseTweet · Mar 8 Jim Gamble frightens me. Something very intimidating about him. How was he ever in charge of protecting children? Nobody RESIGNS from a well paid job. Theresa May called his management style of CEOP a “Quango” #mccann Sharon 'Shazzzaa' Taylor @shazbat2008 · Nov 3 Your not telling me he really thinks the #mccanns are innocent ? Another slime Ball protecting those hideous parents, child protection my arse, I wonder if they paid him off with the Madeleine fund/PLC , paid for lots of things other than looking for their child.... Jim Gamble @JimGamble_INEQE · Nov 3 I don’t know who you think you are but I suggest you contact a good lawyer ASAP. As I’ll be contacting mine to serve papers on you for defamation. You simply can’t say things that are not true without consequences. Sharon 'Shazzzaa' Taylor @shazbat2008 · 21h Where in my opinion of you have i broken the law? You serve papers on me and let's go to court shall we? That will please your friends the Mccanns ... You don't scare me , I don't hide behind a fake profile , bring it on son.... Jim Gamble @JimGamble_INEQE · 20h Good. Pls DM me your details & I’ll have papa Wes served. I also suggest you take professional legal advice as well. You need a lawyer to read your tweet. andy @andyLUHGNW3427 · 17h Take ya bullshit threats elsewhere. The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II Replying to @andyLUHGNW3427
@JimGamble_INEQE and 9 others Is ‘ nipples’threatening those he thinks are women again? 9:42 PM · Nov 4, 2019·Twitter for iPhone 2 Likes
Sean McCaughey @seanmccaugh · 2h You voted to drop bombs on children in the middle-east. Jim was involved in RUC Special Branch that colluded with loyalists. Neither of you are in a position to lecture. The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II · 1h You accuse Jim of some serious stuff yet he doesn’t threaten to sue you for libel odd as he only threatens women stalking & threatening them with legal action this is not libel Jim it’s clear on your timeline #bully #threats #digitalfootprint #mccann #rRUC Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7 · 1h Yes I agree. Not a word of litigation to male tweeters, why is that ? The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II Replying to @EricaCantona7
@seanmccaugh and 4 others No threats against those who accuse him of colluding with heinous acts? 9:16 AM · Nov 5, 2019·Twitter for iPhone 1 Retweet 2 Likes Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7 · 1h Replying to @The_Truth_II
@seanmccaugh and 4 others Odd, don't you think ? Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer · 1h Replying to @The_Truth_II
@EricaCantona7 and 5 others Only ever threatens people who doubt the mccanns who say the obvious. And usually women
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1191512320385654785 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore In the United States, dog handlers can legally obtain bodily components like human placenta & blood, but not always easily, & trainers like Cablk often resort to using their own blood. Re Mary Cablk, scientist at the Desert Research Institute, Nevada #herdriedblood #alive #Mccann 12:27 AM - 5 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1191514638816628738 J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore J B Littlemore Retweeted J B Littlemore The article referenced concerning scientist using her own blood if necessary, to train cadaver dogs - https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/21/magazine/how-to-train-a-cadaver-dog.html #driedbloodfromlivinghuman #Mccann J B Littlemore added, https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1191512320385654785 12:36 AM - 5 Nov 2019
*****
Bringing article over:
“How to Train a Cadaver Dog
By Malia Wollan June 19, 2015
“Drug dogs are trained on drugs, and cadaver dogs are trained on cadaver,” says Mary E. Cablk, a scientist at the Desert Research Institute in Nevada who studies scent detection. Training a cadaver dog requires regular contact with human blood, decaying flesh and bones. In the United States, dog handlers can legally obtain bodily components like human placenta and blood, but not always easily, and trainers like Cablk often resort to using their own blood. Some substitute commercially available ersatz odors (the most common is Sigma Pseudo Corpse Scent, which comes in three kinds: recently dead, decomposed and drowned). But deceased humans produce unique volatile organic compounds, and canines have a keenly attuned sense of smell, so you should practice on the real thing. “You don’t want to put other people at risk,” Cablk says — searches are often in dangerous areas, like collapsed buildings — “to find what is ultimately a dead pet.”
Cablk works about 30 cases a year with sheriffs’ departments in California and Nevada, accompanied by her two cadaver dogs. You don’t want a really smart animal, she says; its curiosity might lead to distraction. Instead, look for a midsize dog that never tires of playing with a tennis ball or pull toy. Eventually, you will teach the dog to associate the smell of death with its toy by making the toy smell like death. Your dog should be exposed to, and trained to find, all sorts of dead bodies — on varied terrain, day or night, rain or shine. “You have the whole gamut, from old dry bones to somebody who dropped dead from a stroke an hour before you showed up,” Cablk says. Until proved otherwise, every area is a crime scene. Coach your dog to calmly sit or lie down when it locates a scent’s source. Digging, peeing and frolicking can destroy evidence.
Because most cadaver dogs are deployed by volunteer handlers, establish relationships with local law-enforcement officers if you hope to get your dog out on a real case. Cablk says cadaver-dog handlers should also be physically fit, able to pass background checks, skilled with maps and GPS, unafraid of the dark and unperturbed by whatever flavor of death a dog might uncover.”
*****
““Drug dogs are trained on drugs, and cadaver dogs are trained on cadaver,” says Mary E. Cablk…”
Is she a non-fiction true Walking Dead?
“Your dog should be exposed to, and trained to find, all sorts of dead bodies — on varied terrain, day or night, rain or shine. “You have the whole gamut, from old dry bones to somebody who dropped dead from a stroke an hour before you showed up,””
Nothing about the cadaver dogs finding live blood…
Calling everyone "Mr Thompson" is a pathetic tactic. I am not Mr Thompson, and quite frankly the number of times you've been proven wrong on this should be enough to embarrass you.
Now let me address your points. Points that you should have been able to pick up on, as they related directly to things YOU have published here.
Firstly, look above at the document you posted from JB Littlemore (and failed to read). It clearly states Buster is a cadaver dog. It also clearly states, in the very same document that Frankie was a cadaver AND blood dog. Why the need to use two different descriptions if ALL cadaver dogs alert to (what you've so ridiculously labelled) dead blood?
You then seem perplexed as to how Frankie could alert to blood and cadaver. That's because you refuse to admit it's a possibility. In short, you're unbelievably thick.
When a drug dog is deployed, do you think heroin gives off the same scent as crystal meth, or crack etc etc? No, they're trained to alert to illegal drugs. They'd no doubt have a field day at your hovel.
The knife question is in response to the second paper, the one that says how blood dogs are used to find murder weapons. Eddie was a blood dog who also alerted to cadaver, same as Frankie. Both would have been able to find a murder weapon, a knife for example, and the knife would not have needed to have been sticking in a corpse for two hours before being removed and concealed.
Are you getting there yet? Of course you're not, you're full of hot air and devoid of any form of intelligence.
Finally, you ask why I asked if you knew how old Eddie was in 2007 and how old Keela was. My reason for asking was because it was blatantly obvious that prior to my question you had no idea.
Your words:
"He has Keela to detect blood, so has no reason to train Eddie with ‘live’ blood but does it anyway."
Eddie was trained long before Keela was even born! So your comment makes no sense whatsoever.
Regardless of all of this, Martin Grime clearly states Eddie alerted to dried blood from a living person. No matter how you try to dress it up, you cannot alter facts...hard as you might try.
You mean that comment wasn’t Written Under the Influence? Really? Written completely sober?
If we hadn’t read your reply, we wouldn’t have believe that it was so. But now, having read your reply, we do believe as it speaks for itself.
So readers know, this is the comment we censored that we thought was from Mr Thompson but now know is from Silver:
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
So blood on a knife...would you class that as "dead person blood" or "blood from a living person"?
When will you admit you're wrong about the dogs and as such get down on bended knee and apologise to all those you've falsely accused of being in gangs and paid off by Michael Wright?
Given the things you've incorrectly said, I would suggest a full blog dedicated to all those you have...shall we say, "been mistaken" about", apologising for your obsessive behaviour, the stalking of their children, families, careers, private lives etc, and to those you befriended and told untruths to...some of whom are no longer with us.
How about that, Mario?
You don't have it in you, do you.
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 3 Nov 2019, 02:50:00”
*****
Let me tell you that to all the people we have shown this comment (those who we have mentioned who asked about the censoring) were unanimous in thinking that it was Mr Thompson. By your confession it isn’t and that only means that you have graduated with flying colours from Mr Thompson’s school of abuse.
The drug dog analogy doesn’t work. The dog is trained to alert to a variety of drugs and whatever it detects, no time is wasted finding substances which are possessed legally. A cadaver dog trained to alert to blood which could have been from a living person could spend a lot of wasted time alerting to blood which was unrelated to any crime. The question is- why didn’t Eddie alert in any other apartment, including Murat’s? Did nobody bleed anywhere other than the McCanns apartment and car? And why would Grime not advise the PJ, who were unfamiliar with the use of these dogs, of the relevance of Eddie’s alerts when blood was also alerted to by Keela?
- Anonymous to Textusa at 5 Nov 2019, 21:23:00 - Anonymous to Textusa at 5 Nov 2019, 20:44:00 - Anonymous to Textusa at 5 Nov 2019, 21:23:00 - Anonymous to Textusa at 5 Nov 2019, 21:40:00 - Anonymous to Textusa at 6 Nov 2019, 07:31:00
You people are really obsessed with a blog you claim none of you read! And that was just on the authorship of comments!
We’re awfully sorry we have apparently misidentified the authors of the comments but the logic employed pointed in those directions.
But is it really important we may have got that wrong?
We don’t think so. Let us give you an example, as to why we don’t think it’s really important:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187396453918035968 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2 @xxSiLverdoexx What I read last night seemed to insinuate you were the person Tex met in Lisbon.....but it was late so perhaps a misunderstanding? 4:52 PM - 24 Oct 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1187397099580788738 00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx Replying to @FragrantFrog @MrDelorean2 @xxSiLverdoexx I can guarantee you I was most definitely not the person who met Tex in Lisbon.. I'd rather eat my own head..๐ 4:55 PM - 24 Oct 2019
***** https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187398404076376064 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2 @xxSiLverdoexx Is that a pumpkin I see on your shoulders? ๐ 5:00 PM - 24 Oct 2019
*****
Is it more important that to know that the Frog may have gotten it wrong or that the Frog thinks Jules is someone who is capable of doing the treacherous double-crossing the person who came to Lisbon did?
Fighting talk from Ben Thompson telling Jim Gamble he will explain matters in in court will help Ponce. Not. All Ponce has left to do now, is call Jim Gamble a 'spaz', 'paedo' or a 'mong', and he will have had the full extent of her repertoire.
Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer · 6h Only ever threatens people who doubt the mccanns who say the obvious. And usually women The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II · 5h I wonder why his interest never stems to children like #charleneDownes she would surely be everything he is involved in #grooming #abuse #safeguarding but not a peep #mccann only. #theresGoldinthemthereHills Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer · 3h Would the Charlene Downes case gain as much public interest and make as much money? Answer is in the question The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II · 2h Watch out Mr Wabbit he will be tracing your digital footprint for having an opinion Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer Replying to @The_Truth_II
@EricaCantona7 and 5 others Look forward to it to he honest. I'll see him in court and explain the difference between opinion and libel 1:51 PM · Nov 5, 2019·Twitter for Android 3 Likes
Seems Jim Gamble is the least of Ponce's problems. This may explain why the gang has been trying to silence the people who know what they have been up to, and why they are acting likes lemmings. Erica Jane's suspension has also had input from the gang.
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191340766238560258 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs For Text USA and others, from Martin Grime's white paper, 2018. VRD dogs alert to 'generic' human blood deposits. #mccann #McCann https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIh98YlXYAULKx0.png 1:05 PM - 4 Nov 2019
[The picture attached says the following (our caps to highlight what CruftMs highlighted in yellow and blue:
“It is the mission of Forensic Canine operatives to locate and accurately respond to the presence of generic human decomposition odour and dried human blood. (Victim Recovery Dog) This will be conducted in any, and all, expected operational contexts, environments and climates likely to be encountered when deployed by the host agency. This will include: surface and sub-surface deposition on land or in water, trace evidence, human decomposition odour transference, and crime scene investigation for GENERIC HUMAN BLOOD DEPOSITS. The remote screening of items of property and clothing will be included to assist in forensic recovery and provision of case intelligence.
generic /dสษชหnษrษชk/ adjective 1. characteristic of or RELATING TO A CLASS OR GROUP OF THINGS; NOT SPECIFIC. "chรจvre is a generic term for all goat's milk cheese" Similar: general – common – collective - non-specific – inclusive”]
*****
CruftMs,
First, we would like to note how went faster than a Lamborghini in a Top Gear show from “Texty! ๐ฅฐ๐” to “Text USA”.
The phrase “…and crime scene investigation for generic human blood deposits” means expected (generic) deposits of blood. Or the different ways blood may be found in a crime scene. Not deposits of whatever blood, as you are trying to imply.
If ‘generic’ referred to blood, that would mean there would be more than one kind of blood, and you say that is certainly not the case.
‘Dead’ blood v ‘live’ blood v ‘only one’ blood, according to our critics:
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191102243484946432 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others Oh dear. It is not 'live blood' Grime says 'blood from a live human being'. As soon as blood leaves the body it starts to decay. So there is no 'live blood' vs 'dead blood'....just blood. #mccann 9:17 PM - 3 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191307225064714241 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @FragrantFrog @BourgeoisViews and 4 others You don't understand what I said. ALL blood has come from a live human being. The dogs do not know if the blood is from a live or consequently dead person...that's why Keela is used too. If she doesn't alert Eddie was alerting to death. 10:52 AM - 4 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Dex________x/status/1191140996563820544 Dex @Dex________x Replying to @FragrantFrog @CruftMs and 5 others What’s the difference between dried blood from a dead person and dried blood from a live person ? > 11:51 PM - 3 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191307678292873217 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Dex________x @FragrantFrog and 5 others There is none and the dogs can't tell us that. All blood has come out of a live human being and as soon as it's outside the body it starts to breakdown. That's why 2 dogs are used, if Eddie alerts only, he is alerting to death, not blood. 10:54 AM - 4 Nov 2019
This tweet was liked by: 00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx Velma Dinkley @VelmaDi42614172 Dex @Dex________x J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
***** https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191308714076246016 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Esjabe1 @Dex________x and 5 others Blood has always come from a 'live human'. They were alive when the heart was pumping the blood ๐ 10:58 AM - 4 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191310846913323008 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Esjabe1 @BourgeoisViews and 4 others Dried blood of a living person? There is only BLOOD. It all starts to dry and decompose as soon as it comes out of the body. Nothing Martin Grime did made his dogs 'less reliable'. Why did #mccann s not use that for defence if true? #McCann 11:06 AM - 4 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191311545600528385 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others Complete Balls. both Eddie and Keela were trained on human BLOOD, it ALL comes from people who were alive at the time and ALL blood starts to decompose as it has left the body. 11:09 AM - 4 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191372860260077570 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @EricaCantona7 @Jules1602xx and 7 others I haven't read it all either but he seems to think there is a difference between 'live blood' and 'dead blood'....and that Eddie the cadaver dog was NOT trained on blood, which he was because MG has stated as much. 3:13 PM - 4 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191661928487231490 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others My source is basic science BLOOD is BLOOD, It ALL starts to decompose once it leaves the body. Grime has said his dogs are trained to alert to 'GENERIC' human blood. That is ALL BLOOD!..contd 10:21 AM - 5 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191665888631644161Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others You are wrong and don't understand how they are trained. ALL blood is alerted to, how would Keela pick up the scent of VICTIMS blood in a murder if it was 'live' blood? #mccann #McCann https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EImltelXYAAluv2.png 10:37 AM - 5 Nov 2019
[Picture attached says following (our caps to highlight what CruftMs has highlighted):
“Following a HOMICIDE with a number of possible suspects, items of clothing from all suspects were screened with HBDD. A NUMBER OF ITEMS RECOVERED that were blood stained. SOME WERE CLASSIFIED AS VICTIM’S BLOOD others were from other persons not involved.
๐ ััื ฮฑะฒั ๐ @Esjabe1 So crucify me because I took a shortcut. And you’re wrong. There is a tremendous difference. THERE IS ๐ข FROM A LIVE HUMAN BEING THAT KEELA (& EDDIE WAS INITIALLY) TRAINED ON & THERE IS CADAVER ๐ข THAT EDDIE WAS TRAINED TO DETECT AND KEELA WASN’T. 1/2"]
This tweet was liked by: Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7 Rosemary @MoonPerrl Phil Tann @PhilipTann1961
***** https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191692736329650177 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others AT LAST has the penny dropped?! Yes blood from a homicide victim was spilled when the person was alive. ALL BLOOD has come from a live person when it's spilled or extracted. There is no 'alive' vs. 'dead' blood! #mccann #McCann 12:24 PM - 5 Nov 2019
There’s no question about that CruftMs thinks that the distinction between dead and live blood is absurd.
But what is relevant to us is that JBLittlemore, via liking some of the tweets above agrees. In fact when we asked him the questions about how would Eddie and Keela react to blood from different kinds of situations, we expected that according to the set of beliefs he has expressed that he would give a very simple and straightforward answer: both dogs will alert to all the bloods you mentioned because both dogs are trained to alert to blood.
But he didn’t. Instead he kept on feeding us information to befuddle. But now he not only has pinned his colours to that mast as he has taken it one step further as he has endorsed the opinion that there is no such thing as differentiation between ‘live’ and ‘dead’ blood.
And guess who is also of the same opinion? Turaffetamer. At the time he even entitled himself as Turfaffetamer and the Dead Blood:
https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1151769629007712256 Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer Replying to @turaffetamer @Esjabe1 and 45 others But thanks for confirming the dogs were correct when they alerted blood, as they are trained to do,Eddie dried blood, because effectively dried blood is dead blood, the blood cell dies once it leaves the human body 9:24 AM - 18 Jul 2019
***** https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1152265136280932353 Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer Replying to @Jules1602xx @Esjabe1 and 45 others That's the evrd dog eddie jules, csi blood dogs are trained to alert to the odour of blood only, so fresh, dried, watered down, will still alert. Eddie will alert to dried blood from a live human because dried blood is dead blood bad releases cadaver odour 6:13 PM - 19 Jul 2019
****** https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1154353027735805953 Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer Replying to @Ntown1976Nick @nessiestressy and 27 others I sniff what I'm trained to sniff, human cadavar including from dried / dead blood woof woof 12:29 PM - 25 Jul 2019
***** https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1155031068849950720 Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer Replying to @Ntown1976Nick @Esjabe1 and 29 others That doesn't change the ducking fact that keela would have alerted to fresh blood or dried dead blood. Why try to deflect that fact, it's pointless. Csi dogs can be deployed within minutes to an assault, what good is a dog if it didn't alert to fresh blood? 9:24 AM - 27 Jul 2019
***** https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1175160176283926528 Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer Replying to @Babs108164110 @Lambykins60 Nope not a prayer. The dogs alert to what they are trained to alert to. One blood the other cadavar and dried blood (dead blood) No other case have the dogs ever been slandered this much and Mr grime still works fbi. This prat is a tnuc 10:29 PM - 20 Sep 2019
Oh, and about the suggestion that blood is ONLY shed by living human beings:
CARE OF THE DECEASED PATIENT WITHIN INFECTION CONTROLICPR011 https://www.nhft.nhs.uk/download.cfm?doc=docm93jijm4n1413.pdf&ver=23960
Page 5 (our caps):
“Additional requirements for service users with infectious disease (particularly blood-borne infection) •Adhering to standard infection prevention and control precautions, perform hygienic preparations (last offices) unless contraindicated in Appendix 2. Disposable apron and gloves should be worn throughout the procedure, eye and face protection should also be worn if there is a risk of splashing. •Hygienic preparation of bodies involves washing the face and hands, closing the eyes and mouth, tidying the hair and possibly shaving the face. GROSS LEAKAGE OF BLOOD AND BODY FLUIDS FROM THE BODY ORIFICES SHOULD BE PREVENTED BY PACKING WITH COTTON WOOL. •ALL WOUNDS SHOULD ALSO BE COVERED.”
one has commented on something an anonymous has mentioned above:
“Anonymous 4 Nov 2019, 11:22:00 Nobody has commented on the experiment with the blood from accident victims. If blood odour was the same from living or dead, what was the point of this experiment?”
*****
This is the article where the experiment is mentioned: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30176172/
“Blood was collected from four young people who died from traffic accidents and analyzed using HS-SPME/GC-MS at different decompositional stages.”
Why was this experiment necessary if all decomposed blood is the same?
Why not use blood from a haematology department and just give it time and allow it to decompose?
It seems the scientists who did the experiment with accident victims cadaver blood were simply wasting their time as they were obvious unaware that they could have used blood from a haematology department.
Maybe their article should be challenged by our critics giving their opinions on Twitter?
The admissibility of human "odor mortis" discrimination in courts depends on the lack of comprehension of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) during the human decay process and of the lack in standardized procedures in training cadaver dogs. Blood was collected from four young people who died from traffic accidents and analyzed using HS-SPME/GC-MS at different decompositional stages. Two dogs, professionally trained, were tested to exactly locate blood samples, for each time point of the experiment. We found a long list of VOCs which varied from fresh to decomposed blood samples, showing differences in specific compounds. Dog performance showed a positive predictive value between 98.96% and 100% for DOG A, and between 99.47% and 100% for DOG B. Our findings demonstrated that decomposing human blood is a good source of VOCs and a good target for canine training.
To those who are insisting that blood decomposes outside the bode once shed by a human being, implying that we have denied that, we recommend that they read our first post of the Blood and the EVR dog posts: https://textusa.blogspot.com/2019/05/blood-and-evrd-dog-part-1.html
We were very clear to explain what we consider to be the decomposition of blood outside the body. https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-X7hitQfC8h8/XO2hAVsawcI/AAAAAAAARu8/D-PATdj5Me8tLQQrjDCmYFBHEP9IzTdaQCLcBGAs/s400/blood%2Bpalette.jpg
And we showed how it blood decomposition differs from the very complex process that is the human decomposition.
Grime says “no trained dog will recognise the smell of fresh blood... they find and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.”! When he says “they”, I take it as him meaning blood detection dogs, not they as in Keela AND Eddie. But it’s left open to interpretation because of the wording.
Without wanting to interfere in whatever Anonymous will eventually reply, could you please provide a link to sustain that statement?
What do you make of the phrase "The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. he is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'".
Having read the article I concede that Keela was unique in her field at that time (2005) so unless any other dogs were trained in the same way by 2007, “ they” was likely to be a reference to both dogs. The article doesn’t mention anything about Keela being used as a means of eliminating Eddie’s alerts as a possible alert to blood ( referred to by others as working in tandem). It only mentions Keela being able to locate minute samples of blood and give a silent alert.
I still think Eddie’s training (Frankie wasn’t handled by Grime) with cadavers in USA, making him an enhanced VRD, meant he didn’t respond to ‘live’ blood. By live, I mean from people who were alive when the blood was obtained and that blood had decomposed subsequently. It would be dried, not flowing
Maybe Frog would kindly give her opinion as to why Eddie did not alert in any other location than McCann related? He was taken to other apartments and to Mr Murat’s home. He was out on the streets. Did no other location have blood residues?
Isn’t it interesting the Frog’s silence to your question, especially taking into account that she shares your concern?
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1179195256702681089 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @Esjabe1 @Cerb32 and 2 others That's the problem - no signals anywhere else & too many signals by one cadaver dog in random places to theorise a cohesive death & body occultation scenario. PJ knew before dogs arrived VRD was trained on decomposing piglets..... 1:43 AM - 2 Oct 2019
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1188973974270689281 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @JBLittlemore Whose point of fact do you start from, though...the McCanns, Team Amaral, Team Rebelo, or where? You must be curious about why the dogs only alerted to McCann-related property & nowhere else. You must be curious about evidence which was ignored...surely? 12:21 AM - 29 Oct 2019
*****
Either the blood shed by the McCanns has a special scent, to which Eddie must have been specifically trained to alert for or no one else in Luz bled in 2007, only them.
The use of "finished off on your moms tits" identified the author straight away. There is a lot to say about his own sex life, but Textusa's great blog is not the place to say it.
This is what Jules has said about the Rat, remember?
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1164444789170987013 00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx Replying to @LoverandomIeigh @_Babalou_ and 12 others The Rat was brilliant.. I loved the Rat.. ๐ But then so did Snips, in a more creepy way.. 8:50 AM - 22 Aug 2019
But then in this exchange with CruftMs, Jules has this to say:
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191843332416266240 Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs Replying to @Esjabe1 @FragrantFrog You still don't understand do you. ALL blood, once outside the body starts to decompose. This is from a cadaver dog training manual...DECOMPOSED blood from INJURIES or FATALITIES, because the dog reacts to both. #mccann https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIpHAlJWkAATD8t.png 10:22 PM - 5 Nov 2019
[Picture attached says the following:
“on the car and scratches it. Check and make sure the vehicles used have not been involved in an accident with serious injuries or fatality, since residual (now decomposed) blood may interfere with training.”]
***** https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1192032765933473792 00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx Replying to @CruftMs @Esjabe1 @FragrantFrog Doesn't 'dead blood' have an 'oily sheen'... (Don't ask) ๐๐ 10:55 AM - 6 Nov 2019
*****
Just asking because the Rat was very specific about an oily secretion:
https://twitter.com/IsmailARat5/status/1129331479786377216 Ismail A Rat @IsmailARat5 Replying to @IsmailARat5 @Cerb32 and 35 others Let’s establish somehing, because I don’t like all the implications that I’m an “anti McCann” and stupid to boot... The dog is a cadaver detection EVRD. It doesn’t alert to nothing. It alerts to presence of cadaver residue. Not something blown in the wind, but actual particles 11:23 AM - 17 May 2019
***** https://twitter.com/IsmailARat5/status/1129332715029975042 Ismail A Rat @IsmailARat5 Replying to @IsmailARat5 @Cerb32 and 35 others from oily secretion bonded to surfaces. And I honestly don’t give a toss about who gets convicted for what. But what I want to know is which Fokkers have been making or taking dead bodies with them on holiday on the Algarve and how is no one noticing? Airport security don’t 11:27 AM - 17 May 2019
*****
Or, to be VERY CLEAR:
“The dog is a cadaver detection EVRD. It doesn’t alert to nothing. It alerts to presence of cadaver residue. Not something blown in the wind, but actual particles from oily secretion bonded to surfaces.”
https://twitter.com/IsmailARat5/status/1128985099549192194 Ismail A Rat @IsmailARat5 Replying to @Cerb32 @maxine68711804 and 32 others You have no support for your basis on ruling what the EVRD detected. If “cadaver scent” qualifies as dried blood, deploying an EVRD AND a blood dog to the location would be utterly redundant. If the dog can’t tell the difference between dried blood and cadaver, it literally 12:26 PM - 16 May 2019
***** https://twitter.com/IsmailARat5/status/1128985365338034176 Ismail A Rat @IsmailARat5 Replying to @IsmailARat5 @Cerb32 and 33 others has no purpose. And that is clearly not the position SYP, NSY, PJ, MG or ultimately the FBI took. 12:27 PM - 16 May 2019
And about the difference between blood decomposition and human decomposition, the Rat had this to say:
“Blood is blood. Once out of the body it is a dead substance. It begins breaking down. But it presents an entirely different signature to cadaverine compounds in general, the “scent of death.”
I’ve seen some of John Coxon’s opinions, I think it was on twitter. He’s entitled to his opinion, which seems to be shared by the majority of people who comment as readers. Cling and glimmer of hope suggest the paper thinks he’s correct. Just setting him up to take the flack for expressing an opinion they covertly agree with.
Well done John Coxon. Ben Thompson is tweeting furiously about this. To prove he is not at all jealous about John Coxon's contributions to the McCann case having been noticed by the popular press. Whilst the only thing he is ever noted for is his jealousy, parnoid delusions, foul language, and his obsession with sex organs and sex toys. eg "strap-on" "c*nt" "arsehole" etc. How can Michelle expect the public to take her tweets on the McCann case seriously, if she can't see "Andy" and Ben Thompson are the same person? Not a good detective.
https://twitter.com/TrollBusterXXX/status/1192376865161437184 Steven Hamilton @TrollBusterXXX Will someone tell Textusa to stop DMing me? If @JimGamble_INEQE wants contact details for Francis Dunn (Ponce) or Sharon Taylor (Shazza) he's quite capable of asking (as if he'd need to ๐). #mccann 9:42 AM - 7 Nov 2019
*****
Prefer my rabbit stew with carrots. Lot of carrots. You know, bring the sssstew to ssssizzling hot, let it sssssimmer for a bit and very sssssoooon carrots will be delicious. A treat for the forthcoming winter.
The other vegetables? Who cares? One never gives any importance to the minor ingredients of a recipe. You know, those that if one doesn’t put them in the pot no one misses them because they neither add or subtract any flavour.
But nice to see you trying to protect your friends.
"But nice to see you trying to protect your friends."
Why is @TrollbusterXX protecting the Ponce of Dubai by falsely accusing Francis Dunn of writing some of the most malicious communications ever posted on the McCann tag and facebook? A pro McCann would not only give her real name to Gamble, but would also advise him to review her posts written in similar vein on the NOT Textusa and laid bare blogs. Therefore the question has to be asked, is Ponce also part owner of the blogs where Ben Thompson, Jules and Zora McCartney regularly cause each other as much embarrassment as they cause for their innocent victims?
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187373061789667330 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2 @xxSiLverdoexx Ah yes...that would be the blood dog which only alerted to dried blood from a living human because we all *know* that blood smells totally different to that from a cadaver..๐คช๐คก #mccann 3:19 PM - 24 Oct 2019
*****
Our caps:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/25264919/
Cadaver dogs: unscientific myth or reliable biological devices? Riezzo I, et al. Forensic Sci Int. 2014. Show full citation Abstract Dogs are commonly used to detect explosives, narcotics, and other illegal materials. In the forensic setting, CADAVER DOGS ARE TRAINED TO DETECT AND LOCATE CONCEALED HUMAN REMAINS OR FLUIDS due to the high sensitivity and selectivity of the canine olfactory system and the relative ease with which dogs can be trained and handled. The need for international and scientifically validated standards has long been outlined by the literature. It is important, therefore, to establish the reliability of the handler/dog team. Our study aimed to detect the real effectiveness of dogs trained to LOCATE HUMAN CADAVERIC BLOOD in very low concentrations, through an optimized and rigorously controlled design which would rule out any possible sources of bias. The study was designed to determine the dogs' OLFACTORY SENSITIVITY TO HUMAN CADAVERIC BLOOD and how this capacity might change as the dilution of blood increases from pure blood to very low concentrations. The further step was to examine the DOGS' ABILITY TO DISCRIMINATE AMONG TARGET (HUMAN CADAVERIC BLOOD) and non-target (confounding substances) odors (discriminative capability). Our results revealed that WELL TRAINED DOGS WERE ABLE TO DETECT HUMAN CADAVERIC BLOOD SAMPLES even when very low concentrations of blood were stored in the tubes, showing high levels of olfactory sensitivity and to discriminate the target odor even when the non-target odor was orders of magnitude higher in concentrations. Although our results are based only on two dogs, the procedure we used may provide a comprehensive answer to the need for a scientifically UNASSAILABLE TOOL FOR QUANTIFYING AND OBJECTIFYING THE PERFORMANCE OF WELL-TRAINED SPECIFIC SEARCH DOGS IN DETECTING HUMAN CADAVERIC BLOOD TRACES.
And noted you have not replied as to why, if Eddie alerts to ALL blood as you say he does, he didn't alert to anything else or any other locations other than what was related to the McCanns.
Do not try to deflect. Why won’t you give an opinion on Eddie’s failure to alert in other locations?
We are also supposing that you’ve stopped laughing and dropped the asterisks in your “we all *know* that blood smells totally different to that from a cadaver..๐คช๐คก”
Your question assumes as FACT that an EVR dog is trained to alert to dried "living human" blood. No, it’s not a FACT.
We have already explained why we don’t think the translation of what Grime said is accurate.
This is what we have as an official statement in the PJ Files by Martin Grime: “O cรฃo EVRD tambรฉm dรก o alerta a pistas sanguรญneas de um humano com vida ou somente de um cadรกver? O cรฃo EVRD รฉ treinado utilizando material completo e desagregado, sangue, tecidos รณsseos, dentes, etc e contaminantes em decomposiรงรฃo. O cรฃo reconhecerรก ne integra ou ‘partes constituintes’ de um cadรกver humano. Ele nรฃo รฉ treinado para odores humanos ‘vivos’, nenhum cรฃo treinado reconheceria o cheiro de ‘sangue fresco’. Eles localizam porรฉm, e dรฃo alerta para sangue seco de um humano com vida.”
As far as we know Martin Grime did not say these words in Portuguese, so this is a translation, not his original words.
We have translated the translation into this: “Does the EVRD dog also give alerts to blood leads from a human with life or just from a cadaver? The EVRD dog is trained with complete and disaggregated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and contaminants in decomposition. The dog will recognise in its entirety or ‘belonging parts’ of a human cadaver. He’s not trained for ‘live’ human odours, no trained dog would recognise the scent of ‘fresh blood’. They however locate, and give the alert to dried blood from a live human being.”
Grime has not signed those words. Unlike with other witnesses who spoke in English, had their words translated at the moment and then have them reread back by the translator, Grime submitted them in English and a translator translated them and that was appended in the files. So, Grime did not say those words but is said to have said them.
Only Martin Grime can clarify what he said or meant. And he can correct an incorrectness in the case there is an incorrectness. Robert Murat corrected his initial statements, the McCanns corrected parts of their initial statements just to name these. As far as we know, we don’t see you raise any problems with them having revised their initial statements.
This situation clearly requires that Martin Grime be recalled and clarify these translated words. Do not make them FACT, do not make them be direct speech from him.
Only Grime himself clarifying what he meant can resolve the argument. Until then, no one can claim them as fact.
You’ve justified the contradiction of the 2 last sentences with “The VRD will alert to decomposition smells, which include dried/ decomposing blood outside the human body. It's quite straightforward.”
Maybe you can give an opinion about something that baffles us. It seems that in terms of criminal interest and of the investigation in question Martin Grime decides to highlight a situation that NEVER happens. Really NEVER happens.
The only way that “He’s not trained for ‘live’ human odours, no trained dog would recognise the scent of ‘fresh blood” can be married with “They however locate, and give the alert to dried blood from a live human being” is for blood shed up to 1 to 2 hours at most post-mortem is not detected but after that it is.
Where, when or how is this of any interest? In what circumstances is a cadaver or blood dog deployed 1 to 2 hours post-mortem to a crime scene? So why mention a possibility that does not exist?
It doesn’t make any sense, does it? Or are you saying that Grime is advising against the possibility of someone planting evidence in a crime scene? But even that is ridiculous because to have any meaning would be for the planter to be waiting for Grime and his dog to arrive, have a knife, cut himself (having to later explain why his DNA was present at the crime scene), drop blood on the crime scene and then hide behind the curtains and gleefully watch his planted fresh blood be… ignored by the EVR dog!
Do note that those words from Grime come in 2008, in a reply to rogatory questions. Meaning that if the PJ didn’t ask him that he would never mention it. Isn’t that a detail that should have been mentioned and highlighted right upfront without the need for anyone to ask him? Why did he hold back such crucial information?
And if he held it with ill-intent when he was in Luz (you have expressed the opinion that Grime cued his dogs so we think the idea of him holding back relevant information may have crossed your mind), then why “release” the info months later?
That’s why we say that until these words are clarified by Martin Grime himself, we will not accept them being taken as FACT because they are not fact.
Note, Martin Grime has had the opportunity to clarify them in the heavily pro-McCann Netflix documentary. He had then the opportunity to alert people that even though he was a cadaver dog, the alerts could have to blood. He doesn’t do that, does he?
Plus, the people who invested over 20 million in that documentary overlooked the obvious discreditation of Eddie and yet they overlooked to do it. They went on about the “possibility” of the DNA found in the Scenic belong to half of the UK but they forget to put in the one argument that would forever create doubt in the viewers minds – that Eddie was apparently also a blood dog. What incompetent money-wasting people. If only they had done their work…
Also, in the time Grime spent with the PJ in Luz, from the time he arrived to the time he submitted his written report, not ONCE does he even INSINUATE that any of Eddie’s alerts could be to blood. But then, months later and because he was asked, he mentions the subject by using as an example an absurd situation.
Note we have a dog handler who IN COURT (where it MATTERS) when asked if a cadaver dog alerted to “skin cells, scabs, or blood in homes” would make them useless, clearly STATES they were trained not to do that: “Baumgart responded to criticisms of his work from defense witness, Andy Falco Jimenez. Jimenez, who has written books on dogs trained to find scents, said during testimony Thursday that a trained dog always will indicate on scents like skin cells, scabs or blood in homes. Baumgart said cadaver dogs are trained not to indicate on those things, because it would make them useless.”
A dog handler, IN COURT, addressing SPECIFICALLY the issue at hand is very clear. They do not alert to dry blood from a living human being.
That’s why we say a cadaver dogs alerts ONLY to what it is trained for: cadaver scent.
Cadaver scent contaminates objects and one of the objects it may contaminate is blood. A cadaver dog alerting to blood means that it’s alerting to the OBJECT blood which contaminated with cadaver scent. The alert is not to the blood scent.
That cadaver scent is the reason why in the experiment we mentioned the scientists used blood from people who had deceased from an accident was used.
Or as said: Anonymous4 Nov 2019, 11:22:00 “Nobody has commented on the experiment with the blood from accident victims. If blood odour was the same from living or dead, what was the point of this experiment?”
Dead blood is what the scientists have described as human cadaveric blood above. The object blood contaminated with cadaver scent.
That would explain why Eddie did not alert to any blood outside objects/locations related to the McCanns, even though we are certain that there were samples of blood shed by living human beings in other locations. Eddie did not miss these samples, he simply did not alert to what he was not trained to alert to.
It’s you, who say that Eddie alerts to dried blood from the living human being who has to give an opinion as to why Eddie didn’t alert in any other location/objects than McCann related. And we are waiting for it.
Or are you saying that stand-alone blood, blood shed by a living-human being, blood that has had no contacts with a cadaver, when it decomposes it will emit cadaver scent, the same as human cadaver?
From Operation Rectangle (Haut de la Garenne)....what was Eddie alerting to on this occasion?
"V/T 9 Re-enforced concrete machine gun post and protective trench, personnel shelter attached. Earth and debris removed by hand and plant machinery to allow access.
The forensic strategy was implemented with the following results.
EVRD – positive indication.
SOCO visual – positive.
Blood dog - positive indication.
Visual – positive
UV – negative (items removed prior to screening).
Quasar - negative
Positive indications confirmed as being recently deposited tissues used to clean up after sex by unknown persons. Offences not suspected at this stage. Retained as exhibit should there be future reports of offences. There will be no forensic submission at this stage." -----------------------------------------------------------------
Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be decomposing blood - it's just part of a different mixture If I bake a carrot cake, the carrot doesn't cease to be carrot after cooking it with other ingredients. A dog trained to alert to carrot will give a positive response, whatever the state of the carrot. As far as Eddie's non-alerts to all things non-McCann...a)we haven't seen the video-recording to see how the dog was deployed on the streets of Luz or in Murat's (where "nothing of interest was found" as opposed to nothing at all) & b)would Eddie have alerted at under-bed area in 5D if Grime hadn't kept calling him away?https://youtu.be/c4NMYPsFKb8? t=2608
I would also remind you that in the Deorr Kunz Jr. case a very experienced cadaver dog alerted to a buried dog which was wrapped in a towel, soaked in human blood belonging to a searcher who was very much alive at the time.
Your comment is complex as it deals with 4 different topics separately. We asked about your opinion on 2 of them, and you returned 4. One would think you would be doing a JBLittlemore.
So, to be clear, your reply covers – not in this order – the following: - Why didn’t Eddie alert other than McCann related objects/items, which we asked. - Is stand-alone blood decomposition the same as human decomposition – the dead v live blood debate – which we also asked. - Eddie supposedly alerted to blood at HDLG in Jersey, a subject that you’re now bringing in, which we consider to be a relevant one. - The “very experienced cadaver dog” in the Deorr Kunz Jr. case, another subject you have brought in.
So, we believe you will understand that we are going to break up our response. We will start with what seems to be the most adverse to our beliefs, the HDLG alert.
In 2008, at Haut de La Garenne in Jersey, Eddie gave 3 alerts, 1 of which proved to be highly controversial and continues to be so.
What started as an investigation into child abuse became a homicide investigation, initially as the result of witness evidence and later because of an alert by Eddie.
2 alerts in the second phase at Victoria Towers were an alert to a recently disposed of paper tissue, said to have been used to clean up after sexual intercourse (with likely traces of blood) and to an accidental blood spillage from one of the research team.
Both Eddie, the EVR dog and the blood detection dog (unnamed in report but Keela) alerted to the tissue and the blood of a living person.
Martin Grime attributed both alerts to the presence of blood, within the training parameters of the EVDR.
The site at Victoria Towers had been infilled with soil and rubble in the 1970s and 1980s, presumably from elsewhere on the HDLG site. Then the site was excavated for the investigation.
The soil from HDLG was said to be contaminated with human bone remains, dating from the 1400s to 1950. The critics of Op R claim that these fragments dated back to the 1940s at least, and were not suggestive of recent homicides.
In the HDLG building, a fragment a forensic archaeologist initially thought could be a fragment of a juvenile human skull was found. The EVRD indicated the skull was human.
It was tested later in laboratories and said to be not bone and not human, possibly coconut husk or wood. This finding has been used to discredit Eddie by certain people.
The first 2 alerts referred to have been used by our critics to prove that Eddie alerted to blood from living people as well as cadaver odour.
Our contention is that Keela’s alerts to blood were correct but that Eddie’s alerts had another explanation; one not utilised by Grime.
Eddie’s alert to the said non-human fragment were explained by Mr Thompson as possible contamination from the soil it was found in, if indeed, it proved to be non-human, as it ended up being proven it wasn’t.
As Mr Thompson then wrote “Bones were found at the original location of the alleged ‘coconut’ by workmen who were laying concrete but these bones were binned at the time. These bones will have been in contact with the said coconut, ergo Eddie was correct to alert to the location.”
To this extent we agree with Mr Thompson. And we are certain that you, an ardent subscriber of secondary contaminations, will also agree.
We also consider it likely Eddie was alerting to the ground contamination of cadaver, as the result of the previous infilling of the site contamination soil when he alerted to the blood and the tissue.
Eddie’s alert was not to the blood but to a cadaver contaminated tissue. Or both blood and tissue were contaminated. Secondary contaminations, not gaseous but physical contact between surfaces, a contaminated soil and a tissue and possibly the blood on that tissue.
Why Grime did not consider this possibility, we can’t say. Again, this a situation that only Martin Grime can clarify.
We don’t intend to get into further debate about the HDLG controversy about possible homicides and a cover-up. What we do know is that dreadful child abuse did occur as there have been criminal prosecutions. It also seems to be the case that attempts were made to cover- up abuse in HDLG.
We prefer to maintain our focus at the alerts by Eddie in relation to the ongoing blood/cadaver debate in the Maddie case.
The reply to the other 3 points will follow when we have time.
To readers wondering what the comment at 8 Nov 2019, 23:27:00 deleted by the Frog contained, it was almost in its entirety what would be submitted by her at 9 Nov 2019, 00:42:00.
The new comment has just one clarification.
In the deleted comment she said “Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be blood - it's just part of a different mixture” and corrected this to “Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be decomposing blood - it's just part of a different mixture”.
Continuing with what appears to be adverse against our beliefs from your comment, having address HGDL we move on to the “very experienced cadaver dog” in the Deorr Kunz Jr. case, another subject you have brought in, it seems it will backfire against you.
Quoting, as you have done in your comment at 9 Nov 2019, 18:34:00 (in reply to Anon 9 Nov 2019, 12:16:00, this article: https://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/07/private-investigator-issues-lengthy-report-deorr-kunz-case/
“In June of 2016 investigators arrived in Leador, Id, and completed a five day targeted search. Investigators flew in Tracy Sargent and her dog “Chance” who is a well known and well respected searcher from the state of Georgia. (…) Tracy Sargent’ Report of Findings Investigator Sargent reports the “Chance” whom is a trained cadaver dog hit five different unknown targets. Chance is trained on human decomposition and human blood pathogen decomposition. The following are the hits (limited) : (…) 3. 10 Feet Due East of camp site. (…) Area 3 : This area was excavated by hand – and found that a previous animal had been buried at this location. During the burial the subject who did the burial cut his hand and bled into a towel wrapped around the animal.”
*****
It does say that “Chance” whom is a trained cadaver dog” but then in the same paragraph says that “Chance is trained on human decomposition and human blood pathogen decomposition”.
Very, very clearly put that h was also a blood dog. Put as it should be put: upfront without any doubt. As it would absolutely have happened in the case Eddie was also a blood dog. But that didn’t happen, did it?
With Chance there’s no doubt that it is trained to alert to 2 distinct scents: human decomposition AND human blood pathogen decomposition.
Immediately it must be noted that there’s a clear distinction between the 2 decompositions, as we have defended all along. Human decomposition, which includes the blood in the body that decomposes together with it and in case it leaks outside the body it will have been contaminated by this decomposition, which we have called ‘dead blood’ and human blood pathogen decomposition, which is the decomposition of stand-alone blood, which we have called ‘live blood’.
This distinction between ‘dead’ and ‘live’ blood has only to do with the presence or absence of cadaver scent in the blood in question. Nothing to do with the scent of blood, regardless of its state of decomposition.
The blood has its own decomposition process. But if this blood hasn’t had any contact with the human decomposition, it won’t ever emit cadaver scent but will only emit the scent of human blood pathogen decomposition.
And it was to that Chance alerted to. As per its “job-description”. So nothing out of the ordinary or out of the expected.
Do show us where it was drawn the conclusion by investigation that the alert was not simply a blood alert.
And that is the point, once that it’s known that Chance may alert to blood as well as cadaver, all the alerts from this dog MUST take that into account.
It will be up to the investigation and the handler to determine beyond any reasonable doubt if an alert is blood or cadaver. In area 3, it seems to have been determined that it was due to ‘live’ blood. No cadaver.
You know what would be the simplest way for there not to have been any doubt? If Chance had only been trained to human decomposition.
In that case, there would be no question as to what he would be alerting to.
If on one hand Chance serves as an example that relevant information about a dog’s capability is to be put forward in a clear and timely way, on the other it raises a very pertinent question about the naming of dogs, a subject which we will deal with better when we return to the FRESH blood experiment from the University of Technology Sydney, provided by you in these tweets:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187454555287621632 https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187454555287621632 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog For Textusa. Maybe this will help you with your blood conundrum. #mccann http://matt-wand.utsacademics.info/publicns/Rust18.pdf 12:43 PM - 24 Oct 2019
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187758277557399552 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog For Textusa on #mccann(as you don't like publishing my replies) If you read the paper you will see CADAVER dogs were used in experiments using FRESH blood. That's FRESH blood from a living person, not a dead person. Hope the lighbulb will be switched on..... 4:50 PM - 25 Oct 2019
Calling a dog a cadaver dog just because it alerts to human decomposition is not that simple and straightforward.
It is simple if the dog in question is solely trained for that but once it’s trained ALSO for blood, as are the dual purpose dogs, best known as Human Remain dogs (trained to find both live and dead human beings, for example in disaster areas) one takes away that exclusiveness and has to be aware and make others aware of this double capacity.
And Martin Grime did not call the attention to in anything similar while he was in Luz, and even where you say he does that – in the rogatory – it’s not as clear as it would MINIMALLY expected to be.
But still on the DeOrr case and cadaver dogs, let us transcribe this article: https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7045.240
“Investigator: Cadaver dogs alert on human remains at campground where DeOrr Kunz Jr. disappeared
Private investigator David Marshburn told KTVB authorities may have finally gotten the break in the case they have been waiting for.
Author: KTVB Staff Published: 2:27 PM MDT June 27, 2019 Updated: 7:50 AM MDT June 28, 2019
LEADORE, Idaho — A pair of dogs specially trained to detect human remains have alerted on an area in the Lemhi County campground where an Idaho toddler vanished without a trace nearly four years ago, according to a private investigator.
DeOrr Kunz Jr., 2, went missing during a family trip to Timber Creek Campground near Leadore on July 10, 2015. Extensive searches of the area have turned up no sign of the boy.
But on Thursday, North Carolina-based private investigator David Marshburn told KTVB authorities may have gotten the break in the case they have been waiting for.
Marshburn said he was asked by family friends and community members to take the case. He said he took his two trained cadaver dogs up to the Timber Creek Campground June 8, searching the area for about a week. He said he was accompanied by Lemhi County Sheriff Steve Penner during the searches.
It took some time for his dogs to acclimatize to the thinner mountain air, Marshburn said, but on the third day, both dogs separately performed "a hard alert" on a specific area of the campground, indicating the presence of a body or remains. The dogs have been trained only to alert on human remains, not a decomposing animal, he said.
According to Marshburn, his dogs are trained only with human cadavers, human bone and teeth so they only alert to human remains. He also added that the dogs are trained to detect remains up to six feet underground.
“Our dogs are cadaver dogs," he explained. "They find cadaver scent – human cadaver scent. So when they do an alert we are pretty confident that they’re finding remains of a human. But are we saying, or can we say it’s 100 percent DeOrr? No. Can we say it’s an Indian from way back? No. We don’t know what’s 100 percent there, we just know the confidence in our dogs that there is human remains of some sort there – it’s just, 'What?'”
The private investigator acknowledged the remains his dogs smelled could belong to someone other than the missing 2-year-old. But Marshburn stressed he was hired to locate DeOrr, and said he believes he has accomplished that.
"I feel it, the closure that everybody needed," he said. After Marshburn's dogs' alert, Penner also brought in an independent cadaver dog, which alerted on the same area of the campground, he said. Marshburn would not say specifically where in the campground the dogs alerted.
The next steps will be up to the Lemhi County Sheriff's Office and local law enforcement to identify exactly what the dogs found.
“I know my dogs and I know what we do and they have their past history of finding people and I’m pretty confident – we feel we have got what we need," Marshburn told KTVB. "And we went back and now the sheriff’s office has got to do their part.”
Marshburn owns a nonprofit called Search For Me Foundation, which deals with missing persons cases. To date, Marshburn said he and his dogs have been part of helping solve 13 cases.
He tells KTVB community members raised $1,900 to bring Marshburn and his team to Idaho to help with the case. The rest of the expenses were paid for out-of-pocket by he and his wife.
The Lemhi County Sheriff's Office announced Wednesday that the Timber Creek Campground will be closed Friday, June 28 through the weekend for a search connected to the DeOrr case..
The campsite was searched with cadaver dogs in the weeks after DeOrr went missing in 2015, but those dogs came up empty.
Former Lemhi County Sheriff Lynn Bowerman has said publicly that he believes DeOrr is dead and that he considers the toddler's parents to be suspects, a body has not been recovered, and no charges have ever been filed.
Let us highlight what matters to the Eddie-the-blood-dog debate from the above:
“The dogs have been trained only to alert on human remains, not a decomposing animal, he said.
According to Marshburn, his dogs are trained only with human cadavers, human bone and teeth so they only alert to human remains. He also added that the dogs are trained to detect remains up to six feet underground.
“Our dogs are cadaver dogs," he explained. "They find cadaver scent – human cadaver scent. So when they do an alert we are pretty confident that they’re finding remains of a human. But are we saying, or can we say it’s 100 percent DeOrr? No. Can we say it’s an Indian from way back? No. We don’t know what’s 100 percent there, we just know the confidence in our dogs that there is human remains of some sort there – it’s just, 'What?'”
The private investigator acknowledged the remains his dogs smelled could belong to someone other than the missing 2-year-old. But Marshburn stressed he was hired to locate DeOrr, and said he believes he has accomplished that. (….) “I know my dogs and I know what we do and they have their past history of finding people and I’m pretty confident – we feel we have got what we need," Marshburn told KTVB. "And we went back and now the sheriff’s office has got to do their part.””
*****
Nothing about alerting to ‘live’ blood.
And are you sure you want to quote this case? It seems all points to parental involvement: http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2016/03/deorr-investigator-death-and-cover-up.html
Are YOU sure you wish to continue Martin Grime's own statement in which he confirmed both dogs (Eddie & Keela) would alert to dried blood from a living human? Even at a body farm, I don't think dogs were trained on either body parts or "cadaver" blood back in 2007. For the record, I don't believe either Jessica or Vernal know what happened to Deorr Jr. at the campground.
While we wait for whatever you have to show us that you truly believe will demolish all our arguments, let’s continue to reply to your comment.
Having dealt with the 2 new subjects you brought in thinking they would be adverse to us, let us now deal with the 2 that were the core of the debate: why didn’t Eddie the supposedly blood dog not alert to any object/location related to the McCanns and if blood decomposition is the same as human decomposition.
This is what you replied about Eddie not having alerted anywhere else outside the McCanns:
“As far as Eddie's non-alerts to all things non-McCann...a)we haven't seen the video-recording to see how the dog was deployed on the streets of Luz or in Murat's (where "nothing of interest was found" as opposed to nothing at all) & b)would Eddie have alerted at under-bed area in 5D if Grime hadn't kept calling him away?https://youtu.be/c4NMYPsFKb8? t=2608”
To be clear, Eddie was also deployed in the following places:
https://twitter.com/SadeElishaa/status/1141361443419430912 00Sade ๐ต️♀️ @SadeElishaa ๐Pop Quiz ๐ Q) Why wasn't Keela deployed to the following places after Eddie, where he did not alert: Murat's Apt 5B, 5D, 5H, 4G (T7's) Area surrounding OC (see pic) #McCann https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D9buLewXYAImi0U.jpg 4:05 PM - 19 Jun 2019
[Picture attached is a screengrab from this link: https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DOGS_INSPECTION.htm “The area surrounding the Ocean Club having been previously assessed with respect to place-names, soil characteristics and proximity to apartment 5A [refer Mark Harrison's report for details], the following areas were selected for search by the "cadaver" dog, all without results: 1 - Between 06h40 and 07h15 the area between Rua da Piteira and Rua da Oliveira; 2 - Between 07h25 and 07h45 the area immediately adjacent to the property known as "Beijaflor" in Rua da Figueira, which area was accessed through the electricity sub-station on Rua do Ramalhete; 3 - Between 07h55 and 08h05 the dirt road and area immediately adjacent to the residence known as "Casa Azul", in front of the residence known as "Casa Pandora", on Rua da Figueira; 4 - Between 08h20 and 08h40 the area between the residences known as "Casa Pandora" and "Quinta Mimosa", in front of the residence known as "Casa Ladeira". Photographs and a map showing the areas is included in the report. The work stopped at 09h00. 08_VOLUME_VIIIa_Page_2058”]
*****
This means there were many more locations than the ones you mention that Eddie the “blood” dog “insisted” on producing false negatives to blood.
We remind you that for you to be right by insisting that Eddie was also a blood dog, there is on video footage of Eddie alerting to blood – according to you that is… – on the key FOB that was in the glove compartment of the passenger door from outside the Scenic, it means Eddie would so good that it would be expected to easily alert to any sample anywhere that had no obstacles between the sample and his nose.
For example, no one has ever let a single drop of blood in the kitchen of 5A because there is video footage of him searching all over it and alerting to nothing.
Again, do watch that piece of footage of Eddie alerting at the Scenic. It’s very clear that Eddie finds the source, completely undirected, returns, sniffs and confirms and only then does he bark. Imagine if that key FOB was just there on the floor in front of him, he would have barked feet away from it!
You say you expected for there to be video footage of the non-alerts in the files. In 2007, video footage was not mandatory (not sure if it is today) and was enough to name the subject-matter experts were present during the diligences who would later certify that all relevant data would be mentioned, to ensure its legal validity.
We have already explained that into a judicial file in Portugal, only go in the documents the investigation deems to be pertinent to the dispatching decision. All deemed unimportant is considered that if included serves only to confuse the decider. That means that even if there was footage, Eddie not alerting in various and diverse locations would have the same fate as all the statements from all those individuals who were questioned and replied “sorry, saw nothing suspicious at all…” which was to not be included in the process. They were questioned, they replied but the PJ considered them not pertinent for the dispatching decision.
When you imply that Martin Grime was being a compromised, or at the very least a very sloppy professional, you also imply that all those present were in cahoots with him.
Indeed, he THE subject-matter expert on the dog alerts but those present were not picked out of thin air to be present in the diligences with him. They were experienced police officers fully aware of the importance and high profile of the case and their presence was to certify that what Martin Grime and his dogs did all that was to be done in each of the diligences. They were not there to make sure he did his job, as we imagine that was what expected, but there to help him to his job the best way possible. Make sure he obeyed every single Portuguese SOP in the matter as well as be on the lookout if he missed something. The case was that important.
For example, what you have mentioned in your comment as an example of Grime interfering with Eddie’s searching, in the example you have put forward in your comment and which we were unable to see him keeping calling him away, it would be the duty of those others present to request Grime that the bedroom be searched again. No one did, all were satisfied as to how the searches went in that apartment.
But going right into that example, what are you implying exactly? You appear to be clearly implying that Grime knew beforehand that there was cadaver/blood scent under that bed in that particular room of apartment 5D and was making sure that Eddie would not alert there.
The first obvious question is, how would he have that information?
Was he given a list of places of where Eddie could alert and he was tasked to make sure Eddie did not alert in them? Did he memorise it all?
And what would he do if Eddie reacted like he did at the Scenic, detecting a scent and going back to be certain he had indeed picked up one before he alerted, would Grime say in front of all “no, Eddie, not THERE, don’t look THERE, look HERE, it’s much better to look HERE, come here you good boy…”?
And why would Grime protect the remainder of the T9 over the McCanns? Why single the McCann out in the group? Why not either cover-up for the entire group or do his job and just direct his dogs to search for evidence pertinent to the case, irrelevant as to who would be compromised by the alerts?
Can you see how ridiculous your proposal is? Your premise is that Martin Grime is not only a compromised professional, as he knows beforehand what and where to avoid and that he will be able to fool the professionals accompanying him during all the diligences and direct the dogs only against the McCanns, all this in a case with literally the entire world looking upon him and his dogs.
If you are implying the Portuguese professionals who accompanied him were in cahoots with him, what reason could they have to let off the hook the other T7 and just focus on the McCanns?
You are entitled to your opinion and that is to be respected. If your opinion is to be taken seriously is a totally different matter. As far as we are concerned, it isn’t and we have to say that we doubt seriously that it is taken seriously by anyone.
But the crux of the question remains: why hasn’t Eddie the blood dog alerted to blood anywhere else other than locations not related to the McCanns? We are still waiting for a convincing explanation from you (or from any of those defending like you that Eddie is also a blood dog and who have apparently gone into "hiding").
Post Scriptum. If you think Martin Grime was such a compromised professional, why do suddenly believe what he says (or to be very precise, what is said that he said) when it comes to dried ‘live’ blood?
You of all people should be the first one to doubt Martin Grime even when he said that Eddie was a dog!
As you might imagine, we left for last in our replies the ‘live’ v ‘dead’ blood debate because it is what out of your comment, what benefits our arguments the most and in what a way!
Honestly, we could not believe our eyes when we saw that you wrote the following:
“Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be decomposing blood - it's just part of a different mixture If I bake a carrot cake, the carrot doesn't cease to be carrot after cooking it with other ingredients. A dog trained to alert to carrot will give a positive response, whatever the state of the carrot.”
And it wasn’t accidental as this was the bit in your initial comment that you would withdraw where you went to the trouble of clarifying: from (our caps) “Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be blood” to “Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be DECOMPOSING blood”.
To be honest, we didn’t understand the clarification because the initial statement did make perfect sense as it was but by adding “decomposing” to it you made it even clearer: decomposing blood + whatever = continues to be decomposing blood in its essence.
Then you used the carrot cake example, and about that there’s only one thing we can say: we couldn’t have written it better. That’s why we couldn’t believe what we were reading!
Let’s use your own words to explain what happens with blood:
If blood is subjected to human decomposition, the blood doesn't cease to be blood after being mixed with other elements of human decomposition. A dog trained to alert to blood will give a positive response, whatever the state of the blood.
See how your words make perfect sense in the ‘live’ v ‘dead’ blood context?
Keela will always alert to blood whatever its state of decomposition and will ignore the scent of other elements of human decomposition (in your analogy other ingredients) that may be mixed with it.
Really easy to understand, thanks to you.
Similarly, a dog trained to alert to other elements of human decomposition will give a positive response to that mixture although it is not reacting to the scent of blood in the mixture but tohose other elements of human decomposition or as JBLittlemore defined them: “decomp components”.
Decomp components that “afflict” the blood, according to him.
Two different dogs reacting to 2 different scents in the same mixture (same object) which is predominantly made up of blood. Your words have made it all so easy to understand.
Continuing to use your analogy, it then becomes very easy to establish the difference between ‘live’ and ‘dead’ blood.
‘Live’ blood would be your cake being made exclusively out of carrots, and in whatever state the cake may be in after having been left on a counter for days or weeks, whatever state of decomposition it will continue to only have carrots and a dog trained to alert to carrot will give a positive response to it, as you said.
‘Dead’ blood would be the above but the cake would have other ingredients. Those ingredients can only be introduced in the “cake” once decomp components afflict the blood. Or in your words, contaminate the blood.
In your analogy, a dog trained to alert to carrot would continue to give a positive response, whatever the state of the carrots because the cake continued to contain carrot AND a dog trained to alert to the other ingredients would also give a positive response having nothing to with carrots, to the cake.
The ingredient dog would not alert to the cake made exclusively out of carrots, or in terms of blood, he would not alert to ‘live blood’.
Now, can you please explain why you wrote this? https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187373061789667330 Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2 @xxSiLverdoexx Ah yes...that would be the blood dog which only alerted to dried blood from a living human because we all *know* that blood smells totally different to that from a cadaver..๐คช๐คก #mccann 3:19 PM - 24 Oct 2019
So what you're saying is that if someone bleeds, then later they die from their injuries elsewhere, Eddie wouldn't alert to the blood that was spilled originally because it wasn't mixed with "cadaver". This is bullshit for two reasons. The first bring that Eddie didn't alert to "cadaver". You show your ignorance by your insistence of repeating this. The second reason is that Eddie alerted to dried blood whether it came from a dead or a living person, hence his title of E.V.R.D. You've managed to understand what the "E" stands for, but think about the V.R.D. Victim Recovery Dog. Used for recovering victims who may not have died, but might be findable having suffered life threatening injuries. THAT is what a VRD dog is, now get a fucking life or at the very least, stop accusing Martin Grime of being a liar.
I'm not one for long-winded posts, Textusa so I'll just make the following few points. The dogs were trained on decomposing blood from a living human, not a cadaver.It was not possible for Grime to obtain "cadaver" blood in the UK. Just as a cadaver dog will not alert to a freshly deceased human which has not produced enough VOC's for the HRDD/VRD to detect, the dog will not alert to fresh blood from a living human until a certain level of decomposition has occurred. The HRDD/VRD/blood dog can isolate the smell of decomposing blood with or without the presence of cadaver odour (the latter, of course, varies considerably according to post-mortem interval) in the same way it can detect the carrot in the cake, whatever the state of the cake. What good is a VRD if it can't detect blood spray at a potential crime scene - a blood loss which can only occur whilst the heart is still pumping blood around the body? With reference to my tweet - I was being facetious. With reference to all the alerts - they can only ever be proven correct, not incorrect, after a live deployment. If Madeleine is proven to be alive/have been alive when she left 5A, how many bodyless convictions Grime was involved in could become subject to appeal?
“The HRDD/VRD/blood dog can isolate the smell of decomposing blood with or without the presence of cadaver odour”
Could you provide a link for that?
So, if we understood you correctly. Eddie alerts to “decomposing” irrelevant of being blood from a human being or from a cadaver? Is that what you are saying?
Eddie was an EVRD dog. He alerted to the resulting scent of the breakdown of volatile organic compounds. He would also alerted to the scent of dried blood from a living human being. Martin Grime was tasked with looking for a evidence of a death, Madeleine's death. He wasn't tasked with doing a detailed, close search for microscopic amounts of blood belonging to any Tom, Dick and Harry in every location. How long do you think that would have taken? The Portuguese couldn't and wouldn't have granted a budget for that. If you don't think Eddie alerted to dried blood from a living human being, then please explain why Eddie alerted to dried blood on tissues used to clean up after sex in a shelter at the jersey care home. You claim Eddie alerted to cadaver only. Why was Martin Grime satisfied there had been no dead body, only dried blood that was from a living human on a tissue?
@14:58 You didn’t read Sadie’s pop quiz either, as that shows the wider areas searched by Eddie. Who said the PJ had a budget for the dog searches that precludes Eddie from searching any areas that Harrison and Grime considered relevant when searching for a body or the scent of a body?
I'm fully aware of the wider areas searched. Do you seriously believe the PJ didn't work to budgets? Even the richest country's police forces work to budgets.
Textusa, I've read your comment and it bears no relevance to the tissue (the type you blow your nose on) that was found in the shelter. So please, look it up and when you do, please reply as succinctly as any other person would. It doesn't require an essay. Also, try to avoid the childish use of emojis as they only serve to bite you when you're wrong.
Succinct, yes, but you're avoiding the main question like it IS a cold. You claim Eddie only alerted to blood it had been contaminated from being in a dead body. So can you explain this regarding the dried blood found on the tissue in the shelter and marked as V/T 9
Positive indications confirmed as being recently deposited tissues used to clean up after sex by unknown persons. Offences not suspected at this stage. Retained as exhibit should there be future reports of offences. There will be no forensic submission at this stage."
What this clear my shows is that a scenes of crime officer gave visual confirmation of blood, Eddie (EVRD) alerted to the blood, and Keela alerted. It also states no crimes were thought to have been committed, so that rules out a dead body.
Could you please describe what you consider to be a visual confirmation of cadaver scent?
By the way, have we denied that blood was found on the tissue? What we have argued is that the alert from Eddie was not to that blood but to contamination from the soil on the tissue.
Very much like with the key FOB, Eddie alerted to cadaver scent on it and Keela to the blood.
Has angry anon actually read the comment about the Jersey findings in your response to Frog? He seems to have missed it or totally ignored it as an explanation for Eddie’s 2 alerts, to the tissue and the blood from one of the investigators.
This is really very simple: The dog would give an alert to dried human blood. This is hardly surprising as human blood was used in it's training.Your insistence that the alert MUST have been to cadaveric contamination of the blood is solely down to your blind refusal to consider that an alert given by that dog could have any other possible explanation than the presence of a cadaver at that very spot. It's pathetic, frankly.
By the way, do you disagree with Mr Thompson that Eddie’s alert to the fragment, originally thought to be from a skull, may have been the result of contamination from human bone contaminated soil which had been in contact with the fragment?
"Visual confirmation of cadaver contaminant?" You've just made that up, plucked it from thin air. It was visual confirmation of blood. You can't see the smell of a dead body. As for budgets, are you telling me the PJ had an unlimited budget? Again, you're being silly, in fact no, you're just a troll who enjoys lying about the case of a missing child. You need to get a job and do something useful with your pitiful existence.
No forensics were taken. No suspicion of a crime in that area, yet you think the blood of a dead person was confirmed by an officer. That's crazy talk.
...and for the love of God. What the fuck has your obsession with Ben got to do with any of this, apart from the FACT he and several others have shown you up to be an outrageous liar? Perhaps you should concentrate on facts instead of trying to argue night is day.
Anonymous 11 Nov 2019, 19:34:00, Anonymous 11 Nov 2019, 19:35:00, Anonymous 11 Nov 2019, 19:38:00,
Sorry, you said the alert was blood because there was visual confirmation of blood and so it had to be blood.
Using your logic, for there EVER to be an alert to cadaver that has to be visual confirmation of cadaver contaminant. Yes, fully aware that it’s not visible, just highlighting the flaw in your dogmatic logic.
Did the PJ have unlimited budget in 2007 for Maddie? Obviously, yes.
Please tell us where we have said that it was the blood of a dead officer. Thank you.
We see that you haven’t said if you agree or disagree with Mr Thompson.
https://twitter.com/Cerb32/status/1193909568906186752 Cerb32 @Cerb32 Replying to @gkylilghost @Ntown1976Nick and 27 others Eddie was only given the #mccann clothes to check. The PJ should have included clothes from other sources to make a fair test and to reduce the risk of a false positive. 3:13 PM - 11 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/gkylilghost/status/1193910072478437376 geeky little ghost @gkylilghost Replying to @Cerb32 @Ntown1976Nick and 27 others Did he check other cars? Apartments?? 3:15 PM - 11 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1193927413325021185 00The Jules... ๐ต️♀ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx Replying to @gkylilghost @Cerb32 and 27 others Yes he did funnily enough..No alerts.. 4:24 PM - 11 Nov 2019
No, I said it was blood because it was visually confirmed as such, that Eddie and Keela both confirmed it as such, that it was concluded that there was no evidence of a crime, AND that as such there was no need for further forensics. Now unless you know better and think a single tissue would be used to clean a minute amount of blood after a death, but was then left at the crime scene along with the semen of the perpetrator, then you're making it up, along with your claim that someone here said it was the blood of a dead officer. As for Ben, if I wanted to debate the dogs with him it would stand to reason that I'd leave a comment on his blog. As you seem to have quite the fixation with him, why don't you do the same?
Serious question - do you do anything all day except sit and obsess about this case and copy other people's tweets? You don't appear to be employed, you are far too interested in the private lives of others, and you seem to enjoy deceiving people. None of this is normal behaviour.
So, according to angry anon, Eddie is now a cross-trained dog! But look what is said about evidence in court. How convenient for the Mcs if Eddie could be proved to be a cross-trained dog.
“The HRDD/VRD/blood dog can isolate the smell of decomposing blood with or without the presence of cadaver odour”
Could you provide a link for that?
So, if we understood you correctly. Eddie alerts to “decomposing” irrelevant of being blood from a human being or from a cadaver? Is that what you are saying? ----------------------------------------------- Yes. Eddie was trained separately on decomposing human blood obtained from a path lab, not a corpse. Of course, if you want to go down the road of decomposing pigs' blood versus decomposing human blood when it came to Eddie's alerts then be my guest. A dog cross-trained on animal remains cannot be classed as a human remains detection dog
According to the article, cross trained dogs must be taught different alerts, “one for live finds, one for drowning etc.” Grime makes no mention of Eddie being cross-trained or using different alerts. The only alert mentioned is that he barks.
Rather sickening to see the so-called 'Anti-McCanns' rush in with such savagery to try and prove the dogs were cross-trained and multi-talented. Next we'll hear them say Keela was also a cadaver dog. Logic doesn't come into it.
We hope readers enjoyed yesterday’s debate. We did.
Insulting comments interspersed with deliberate misrepresentation about what had been said, plus swerving answering questions.
All signs of losing the argument.
And so typical of Mr Thompson and NotTextusa.
An upside to this is that FINALLY Jules has correctly anticipated something:
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1189269048519004161 00The Jules... ๐ต️♀ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx Replying to @FragrantFrog Cheeky lol.. Anyone is a threat to their credibility, but esp JBL.. Oh and NT.. Who I'm sure will be wiping the floor with them soon.. ๐ 7:53 PM - 29 Oct 2019
If one considers “soon” to be 13 days, then yes, she was finally correct on the return of NotTextusa. Finally, Jules has said something would happen and, surprisingly, it did happen. Now we just have to wait for the pictures of the BRT and Mr Thompson’s return to Twitter.
If NotTextusa wiped the floor with us or not, we’ll leave it up to the readers to judge although having said how much we enjoyed seeing him struggle, is an indication of our opinion on that subject.
We are showing this because it shows this “ambush” was prepared. We already knew that their last powder-shot in the attack to make Eddie be a blood dog, would be the tissue alert at HDLG.
A subject we had investigated but have avoided for the reasons expressed in our first comment about it.
And NotTextusa was not prepared for us being prepared, so he opted to confuse people regarding HDLG.
So, to simplify:
There is no dead officer. The blood was from a search team member.
There was no suggestion the tissue was in contact with a recent cadaver.
The proposal is that both alerts by both dogs were to a porous tissue with blood from a living person and a living search member’s blood on ground contaminated by historical human bone deposits.
Both dogs made positive alerts to “a small human blood deposit confirmed as being an accidental spillage by one of the search team.”
Earlier it was said by Grime “human remains deposited within the ground in that area would contaminate the ground and any porous material within it…”
Although Grime wasn’t referring to the Victoria Tower here, we are proposing that the soil here was similarly contaminated and the tissue was a porous material on contaminated ground. Likewise, the blood of one of the search team found on the ground.
So the blood dog alerted to blood, correctly.
Eddie, the cadaver dog, alerted to soil contamination from historic bone deposits on the tissue and the search member’s blood found on the contaminated ground. Eddie alerted correctly as a cadaver dog.
Are you being facetious in your comment at 11 Nov 2019, 22:12:00?
It’s important that is clarified.
PS. Noted you haven’t provided the link, nor have provided any links to the claim that “Eddie was trained separately on decomposing human blood obtained from a path lab, not a corpse.”
You should read this and inform yourself about the blood from a search team member because we think you’re confused about Op Rectangle. http://voiceforprotest.blogspot.com/2010/03/operation-rectangle-summary-report.html
We were not referring to the PJ officer in the Mc case, whose blood was found in the apartment.
We referred to a member of the search team in Op Rectangle who shed blood in the Victoria Towers site in HDLG.
@Textusa 13.24.00 It's a logical conclusion. The dog would only alert to substances within its training parameters. Eddie was trained on decomposing porcine material, which included pigs' blood. Of course, if you believe Eddie could have confused decomposing pigs' blood with human blood, you are doing the dog a disservice, aren't you?
Ah, a logical conclusion. Using your logic, plucked out of your head.
No, we are not are not doing a dog a disservice.
It is not we who have the necessary qualifications to say that uneviscerated piglet remains are similar to human decomposition but we imagine those in the British scientific community with the responsibility for the accreditation of cadaver dogs to make such an assessment, do.
We would say that with your words you are doing a big disservice to that scientific community, but that is entirely up to you.
By the way, you are aware that Eddie trained with human cadavers in the US, are you not?
And also, as you haven’t, could you clarify if you were facetious in that particular comment, it’s important that we know if you were.
I recommend you read, in full, Grime's 2018 White Paper, Textusa, paying particular attention to page 53/187. Hopefully all will become clearer to you.
“Only detection canine resources trained specifically in the detection of human decomposition may provide reliable intelligence. Resources trained with the inclusion of animal-based training aids provide a far wider interpretation of canine responses that must include the source may equally be animal or human. If detection canine training is inclusive of food-based pork products this widens the interpretation spectrum to include foodstuff.”
The White Paper was written in 2018, the uneviscerated piglet was what was the standards set by the accreditation authorities in 2007.
It’s up to the British authorities to guarantee, then and now, that the nation’s police has the necessary and appropriate means to accomplish the missions the canine units are assigned.
Irrelevant of that, Eddie in 2007 acted in accordance to the 2018 standards as he was trained in the US.
"It is widely accepted asbeing impossible to extinguish conditioned odour recognition from a detection canine olfactory repertoire. Therefore, such animals will not be classified as properly trained, or proficient, within today’s acceptable parameters. The use of such resources will be easily discredited within judicial process. When considering the working life of these canines may be 8-10 years this does not represent good Value for Money. Nor does it reflect well on the British Police Service reputation regarding due diligence in relation to scientific development and improvement."
Repeating ourselves:
"The White Paper was written in 2018, the uneviscerated piglet was what was the standards set by the accreditation authorities in 2007.
It’s up to the British authorities to guarantee, then and now, that the nation’s police has the necessary and appropriate means to accomplish the missions the canine units are assigned.
Irrelevant of that, Eddie in 2007 acted in accordance to the 2018 standards as he was trained in the US."
“It should always be borne in mind that there may be innocent and logical explanations for VRD responses not connected to criminal activity: •Historical remains •Direct or indirect transference of odour by persons having contact with human remains professionally. •Persons recently in contact with deceased relatives •Items of furniture from deceased persons dwelling”
*****
Funny, no mention of the possibility of the alert being blood from a living human being…
Wouldn’t THAT be right at the top of the list taking into account that if EVR dogs alerted to living human blood?
Grime's task was to use the VRD primarily to locate a body or provide intelligence as to where one may have been temporarily deposited. CSI officers had already examined 5A immediately after Madeleine was taken. Didn't they do their job properly iyo?
Fragrant Frog, Just wondering what you actually believe regarding Madeleine, do you believe she's still alive? Or that she died somewhere else & not in 5A?
Frog 20:50, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15966054/ Numerous applications of water to a surface will make luminol ineffective. If the blood is not detectable to the naked eye or to luminol, a blood detecting dog can detect what a human can’t. Please don’t blame the Portuguese police for failing to detect what Keela was able to locate. But you’re now going to argue there was no evidence the cellular material found was blood? Can everyone see where this is heading on the arguments so far, from various quarters.
The blood dog didn’t detect blood. It was only cellular material, which could have been skin cells. The cadaver dog wasn’t a cadaver dog. He was a cross-trained dog who also searched for living people. He alerted to pig remains because he couldn’t be retrained for cadaver. odour. He alerted to blood shed by living humans. All of the alerts explained away.
It’s our opinion that all who were involved in the forensics of the case in Praia da Luz, both human and canine, did their jobs brilliantly and very professionally.
Note, we said “in Praia da Luz” as this opinion does not extend elsewhere.
If there’s any criticism, we would say that the Portuguese forensic experts should have asked the British ones who told them (not suggested) how the samples should be collected to leave the premises.
I 100% don't believe Madeleine died in 5A. Whether or not she is alive now depends on the reason she was taken on 3rd May 2007 and if it would benefit someone to ensure she remains alive.
Anonymous 13 Nov 2019, 10:04:00 The potential crime scene had been contaminated prior to Eddie & Keela's arrival both before & after the McCanns holidayed in it. Therefore, any cleaning using a bleaching product could not be directly attributed to the McCanns. Likewise, blood & bloody bodily fluids could have been deposited after the Portuguese CSI team had done their sweep on 4th May. I'm not going to argue about the type of bodily fluid/cellular material sent for testing as it was clearly of insufficient quality & quantity for the FSS to run all the relevant tests. Obtaining a DNA profile from each sample was surely the priority. Whatever you may believe, Grime himself has now stated that a dog cross-trained on animal products is not a human remains detection dog. However he was not cross-trained to find living humans using generic human scent. One wonders what your opinion of the dog alerts will be if Madeleine is found alive. Grime has covered his defence well in his 2018 White Paper.
To the frog,where is it written about a cadaver dog alerting to a buried dog,the private investigator employed by the family of the child (Deorr Kunz JR) only confirms dogs alerted.The private investigator now believes the family were involved.
Klein: I’m not going to discuss where it was or the circumstances around it because it will be an integral part of the prosecution, and I don’t want to the hurt the prosecution, but a cadaver dog did hit. That has never been announced before, but we’re announcing it today because we feel the public needs to know.
Area 3..taken from Philip Klein's full report released July 2016... https://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/07/private-investigator-issues-lengthy-report-deorr-kunz-case/
Tracy Sargent’ Report of Findings
Investigator Sargent reports the “Chance” whom is a trained cadaver dog hit five different unknown targets. Chance is trained on human decomposition and human blood pathogen decomposition.
The following are the hits (limited) :
1. “Diaper Tree Area” – This is the area to which it was testified that “a diaper” was hung in the tree in the campground. 2. 139 Feet East of the Cattle Guard in the camp ground – in a loose ground area. 3. 10 Feet Due East of camp site. 4. 2.24 miles due Northeast of the 15 mp stake, in the ravine near 221 southeast fence. 5. Camp site ground .75 miles due East of the camp ground.
Area 1 : There was no evidence obtained. Area 2 : Excavation was undertaken by LE and KIC – this area needs to be further exhumed and was turned over to Law Enforcement for further investigation by their team. Area 3 : This area was excavated by hand – and found that a previous animal had been buried at this location. During the burial the subject who did the burial cut his hand and bled into a towel wrapped around the animal. Area 4 : Investigators have turned this area over to law enforcement. Area 5 : Investigators believe this site may have been a “holding site” for some type of human body.
There was no other evidence found. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Cadaver dogs also alerted at the campground back in the summer (see David Marshburn's deployments) but still no confirmation human remains have been located at any of the alert points.
The Ponce of Dubai falsely accuses more people of being paedophiles, sex offenders and having disabilities than anyone else on twitter. Her and her gang's racist abuse of travelling communities being peg sellers and tarmac layers has been unrelenting since @LoverandomIeigh joined twitter. See @LoverandomIeigh's timeline to see the disgusting use of a severely disabled ginger haired male's photograph to see how sick she is. She alleged the male was @LoverandomIeigh's partner and father of her children. I will not post the link, as the male featured will be unaware the photograph of him has been abused in this malicious manner. See @Strackers74's timeline to see how she and her friends have also been stalked and abused by Ponce of Dubai and her gang.
The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II Replying to @forgedaboutitt
@TrollBusterXXX and 2 others @TrollBusterXXX suggesting someone is a paedo to try to scare them into dropping their challenge to a known #cyberbully who’s pulling Steve’s strings 9:40 AM · Nov 8, 2019·Twitter for iPhone 3 Likes
What I wonder about most in this case is whether or not the hoax participants ever feel any sense of guilt for what they've done. The way I see it is if one knows the truth then all of them know exactly what became of the non missing child.
How do they sleep at night knowing the fraud that's been committed on a global scale? It simply beggars belief for those of us who live in the real world.
What do you think, Textusa? How do they function normally and live with the secret knowledge of the century?
We don’t think we can answer that question, or even attempt to try.
All we can say is that they don’t behave in public in the way one would expect and that’s all. How they behave in private is another matter and it only concerns them.
We won’t give our opinion on their mental state as not only we’re not qualified to do so as we don’t think we should even if we were.
There are a lot of people involved in this sorry affair who should be feeling the weight of their guilt.
Telling the truth at the very beginning would probably have been easier in the long run. Any normal person who knows the truth has to feel disturbed on some level considering at least one investigation is hanging over their heads.
And quite frankly, none of them know for sure that the truth won't be revealed in glorious technicolor at some point in the future. There's no guarantee that someone on the outside won't find out and spill the beans.
In other words, it's not over till the fat lady sings, and nothing stays secret forever.
One tactic our critics use very, very often is to make claims without providing links.
This is not done innocently. Not at all.
The primary objective is obvious to all and that is to gain with time what can be gained, as the Portuguese say “enquanto o pau vai e vem, folgam as costas” (our translation, while the club goes and comes back, the back rests).
They make the claim, we ask for a link, and while we wait for them to provide it the claim has registered in readers’ brains.
As we live in the age of selective hearing – we allow ourselves to hear concurrent opinions and naturally reject even without hearing what are perceived as opposing views – this tactic is quite effective, as it feeds into what Robert Ailes said “people don't want to be informed they only need to feel they have been informed.”
But this is not their sole objective with this, sometimes it’s taken a step further. Very subtle and very effective and that is to use what is apparently true against the truth.
Let’s see if the reader can spot it in this comment submitted yesterday which is the perfect example of the above and we did not publish because we wanted to single it out for this very reason:
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
Anon 21:18 All alerts need to be corroborated by forensics otherwise they cannot be used in a criminal court. This is made very clear by Martin Grime every single time he discusses the alerts. He also clearly states that the alerts could be to EITHER of the two things Eddie alerts to. Please look for yourself instead of taking the word of a blogger who has very limited knowledge of the dogs or their training.
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 11 Nov 2019, 22:46:00”
*****
We believe the reader will most likely be baffled as to why we didn’t publish this comment then and there as besides a very unusually bland insult, the rest of the content seems relevant and pertinent to the case. Why we didn’t publish it is what we intend to explain with this comment.
The first reaction on reading it is to think that Martin Grime never said “that the alerts could be to EITHER of the two things Eddie alerts to”, so the expected reaction would be to provoke us into calling the bluff and demand a quote.
And if we had done that we would have fallen into the trap.
Not we wouldn’t debunk that statement but while we were going to the trouble of doing that, the readers would have registered that Martin Grime had indeed said that the alerts (note plural) could be either of 2 things (blood or cadaver) and that would immediately validate the phrase “the two things Eddie alerts to” (blood and cadaver), creating in readers minds the idea that Eddie was INDEED also a blood dog and to those who are against us, that would be all they needed to read.
To understand, one has to read the quote with which we are certain Anonymous would return with and that would be this from Martin Grime about the canine vehicle searches in August 2007: “It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to ‘cadaver scent’ contaminant or human blood scent. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.”
Grime clearly says “‘cadaver scent’ contaminant or human blood scent” which would prove that we were wrong and that would absolutely prove that Eddie is indeed a blood dog, right?
What the reader would have missed, and THAT was the intent, would be the plural v singular in Grime’s words and that detail is what makes the whole difference.
So, we ask the reader to read the comment again and see that it says (our caps) “He also clearly states that the ALERTS could be to either of the two things Eddie alerts to” and it intentionally doesn’t say (our caps) “He also clearly states that AN ALERT could be to either of the two things Eddie alerts to”.
See the difference? Subtle but very importance and so intentionally inducing into falsehood.
It should be AN ALERT and not ALERTS because Martin Grime gives this opinion ONLY to ONE alert and that is Eddie’s alert in the Scenic.
Why is that? Why is Grime raising the possibility that this PARTICULAR alert from Eddie can be from blood but doesn’t raise similar concern about all the other alerts: bedroom, living-room, back-yard, cuddle-cat and McCann clothing?
Isn’t that strange, to say the least?
We have already spoken about these specific words from Grime and promised we would speak about them when we write about the operational use of the dogs, because they are indeed important but their importance has to contextualised.
For now, we just want to highlight how our critics – “antis” who are so desperate to prove that Eddie is also a blood dog so that his alerts at the Scenic can be dismissed – intended to goad us by using Grime’s words – that he indeed said – against Eddie in all his alerts.
If we had published the comment, the ‘conversation’ would have gone much like this:
Anonymous (in comment): “This is made very clear by Martin Grime every single time he discusses the alerts. He also clearly states that the alerts could be to EITHER of the two things Eddie alerts to.”
Us: “Please provide a link or a quote for that statement, thank you.”
Anonymous: “You want a quote? It just shows how you haven’t even read the files! Here it is, Martin Grimes own words: “It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to ‘cadaver scent’ contaminant or human blood scent”. Now try and twist that you fool!”
Note that the previous sentence, which refers to whether alerts would need forensic corroboration ends in plural “alerts” and this links up nicely to the plural “alerts” to be used in the deceiving sentence. Neat, isn’t it? Quite seamless.
If Anonymous was intellectually honest or really wanted to be truthful, s/he would have given a link or the quote upfront instead of saying “Please look for yourself instead of taking the word of a blogger…”
We hope the reader can now see how if we had fallen for this trap and published the comment and waited for the reply, it would fool many and would target especially those who find the subject complex and hard to follow.
It’s a very fine distinction of words and meaning... tricky. Fortunately, some of us are paying attention.
Perhaps the tension in this discussion might’ve been eased if attention had been given to the function /meaning of the indefinite article ‘an’ in the English language, as in ‘an alert’
For instance [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_(grammar) ]: “An indefinite article indicates that its noun is not a particular one identifiable to the listener. It may be something that the speaker is mentioning for the first time, or the speaker may be making a general statement about any such thing.”
Thirteen yrs on its all the likes of frog have, its to rubbish the dogs,if they falsely alerted then ergo Madeleine was abducted,no other evidence to say so.
https://twitter.com/MancunianMEDlC/status/1193879539031724032 SOCIALIZED MEDICINE @MancunianMEDlC Replying to @BourgeoisViews @scamhunter486 and 47 others There was MM Blood found in the apartment ... In the Floor Tile & on The Window Sill ... Confirmed ... And Blood Splatter all up The Walls .... Police Evidence Photo .. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EJGC7DiXsAAGqGP.jpg 1:13 PM - 11 Nov 2019
[Picture attached was made by us: http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/10/remarkable-marksmanship.html http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-S8eKO8-PQN4/Um7EqvJOHZI/AAAAAAAAHDo/e21OELlegp4/s1600/blood+no+grid.JPG]
*****
It’s interesting to see someone who doesn’t like us to use our stuff without any acknowledgment. MancunianMEDlC wasn’t the first and certainly won’t be the last.
But that’s not important, what is important is MancunianMEDlC’s opinion that the splatter in the image is blood.
We would like to know who disagrees with this tweet about the living room areas indicating blood, or as the Frog has put it in her comment at 11 Nov 2019, 14:50:00: “What good is a VRD if it can't detect blood spray at a potential crime scene - a blood loss which can only occur whilst the heart is still pumping blood around the body?”
Also please take into account that these stains on the couch are also included as being part of that blood spray: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-A3B9Bs8AnjQ/UgtK9RW48lI/AAAAAAAAGeI/slPF1HwAG3w/s400/5A+couchl+DNA.JPG
We’re asking because we think it’s very relevant to Eddie-the-also-blood-dog debate.
Apologies to our readers as we have requested something without establishing some basic rules.
Moronic comments just stating – in whatever number of words – that “it’s not blood” will obviously not be published.
We want to know from those who say that it’s not blood, what do they think it is, taking into account what we have said in our post “DNA is… DNA”: http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/09/dna-is-dna.html
For example, we are curious as to what our critics will say what are stains #5 and #14.
And besides the above (stating what biological fluid other than blood the stains are) we would also like to know what our critics think Keela alerted to.
Hope now all is clear. Thank you for understanding.
If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself:
https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1194858233988632577 Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer Replying to @SteMotson Also since you love pointing out grammar so much, what does 'one one' mean? Also it's interesting you mention only the evrd alerts,where some alerts both dogs corroborated each other. You really are the fikest shill. Also not so long back you didn't know Eddie alerted to blood ๐คฃ 6:02 AM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
Following the Frog’s school of “cross-trained” Eddie.
From Joseph Goebbels Wikipedia page: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels
“If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself. Compare sourced quote set forth above: "The English follow the principle that when one lies, it should be a big lie, and one should stick to it." Attributed to Goebbels in Publications Relating to Various Aspects of Communism (1946), by United States Congress, House Committee on Un-American Activities. No reliable source has been located, and this is probably simply a further variation of the Big Lie idea. Variants: If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. If you repeat a lie long enough, it becomes truth. If you repeat a lie many times, people are bound to start believing it. Attributed in The Sack of Rome (2006) by Alexander Stille, p. 14, and also attributed in A World Without Walls: Freedom, Development, Free Trade and Global Governance (2003) by Mike Moore, p. 63.”
Has anybody found the Praia da Luz crematorium yet?
We have finally someone who has ventured what “other fluids” (Martin Grime’s words) are that Eddie may have been trained to.
To put it in context, this venturing stemmed from this convo between the latest “Eddie-is-a-blood-dog” warrior, Snips and Whispering who is someone who openly supports the blog:
https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195082185453318167 ✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16 With keela alerting - blood Without keela alerting - cadaver #tandem #mccann 8:52 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1195089438885523486 Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16 Replying to @Max_____xxx No, Eddie alerts, cadaver and only cadaver Keela alerts blood #mccann 9:21 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195089780331229187 ✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16 Whenever eddie alerts independently it’s cadaver. 9:23 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1195090563911102465 Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16 Replying to @Max_____xxx Whenever Eddie alerts, it’s cadaver. #mccann 9:26 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195090956195966982 ✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16 Whenever keela alerts - blood 9:27 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1195091668929851398 Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16 Replying to @Max_____xxx And whenever Eddie alerts it’s to cadaver. #mccann 9:30 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195091906138714123 ✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16 https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm … 9:31 PM - 14 Nov 2019
During the convo above, AnnaEsse intervenes to help Snips:
https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195086690869817352 ✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx 43m43 minutes ago With keela alerting - blood Without keela alerting - cadaver #tandem #mccann 8:52 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195086690869817352 AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse Replying to @Max_____xxx @Anvil161Anvil16 Yes, if only Eddie alerted, the alert was to cadaver odour. 9:10 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1195089438885523486 Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16 Replying to @Max_____xxx No, Eddie alerts, cadaver and only cadaver Keela alerts blood #mccann 9:21 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195091550004502528 AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16 @Max_____xxx If only Eddie alerted it was to cadaver odour. "Eddie' The Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (E.V.RD.) will search for and locate human remains and body fluids including blood" A statement by Martin Grime. https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm … 9:30 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1195092627324121104 Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16 Replying to @AnnaEsse @Max_____xxx - yes, to human CADAVERIC blood What ‘human fluids’ was Eddie alerted for? 9:34 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195094366106345472 AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16 @Max_____xxx That's not what Martin said. Eddie was trained to alert to cadaverine, the organic compound released from a cadaver. If he was trained only on decomposing blood from a cadaver and Keela only to blood, if only Eddie alerted it was to cadaverine. 9:41 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195094602249883648 ✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx Replying to @AnnaEsse @Anvil161Anvil16 I think Mr Grime knows best. 9:42 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195095914697900033 AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse Replying to @Max_____xxx @Anvil161Anvil16 Me too. Whether blood from a cadaver or fresh blood, Eddie alerted to it. Martin doesn't qualify 'body fluids,' but we can have a guess: lymph, saliva, bile, urine, cerebrospinal fluid. It would be interesting to know if trained on each fluid, a mixture or just a few. 9:47 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195096223251927041 ✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx Replying to @AnnaEsse @Anvil161Anvil16 You can research these facts online. 9:48 PM - 14 Nov 2019
***** https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195096577636913155 AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse Replying to @Max_____xxx @Anvil161Anvil16 Yes, it's all online. 9:50 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
So now we have Eddie the “Jack-of-all-scents” dog. Alerts to cadaver, blood and “lymph, saliva, bile, urine, cerebrospinal fluid”.
Interesting that in all locations in which Eddie alerted and Keela didn’t (which means blood is ruled out – according to our critics because both don’t alert, according to us simply because Keela doesn’t), there was no forensics to look for “lymph, saliva, bile, urine, cerebrospinal fluid”.
Oh, and yes, it’s all online but please consult with our critics what to pick and choose that is to be read absolutely literally and withdrawn from context and what has to be interpreted in the context it’s said.
We would like to know what Snips and AnnaEsse think are the reasons why Eddie didn’t alert to any other blood in Praia da Luz other than locations/objects related to the McCanns.
And, while we’re at it, why did Eddie alert supposedly to blood in 5A in locations that one would not expect to find any blood (corner of living room behind couches, corner of living-room near closet and flowerbed) and did not give any alert to the locations we are certain there were accidental bleedings such as the kitchen and bathroom?
Or in the path between the 2 entrances, as someone who has injured him or herself outside would have to walk when walking inside to treat a wound…
We, the disgusting McCann supporters are trying to show how Eddie’s alert at the Scenic PROVE that a human cadaver was inside it, while the above suspicion anti-MCann like yourself are desperately trying to cast doubt over Eddie’s alert there by dismissing it by saying it could only have been to blood from a living human being.
Continuing with the debate about whether Eddie was also a blood dog, we would like to bring to it the PJ.
The PJ gives its opinion on the dogs before and after Martin Grime’s rogatory.
Before, it’s via the Tavares de Almeida interim report of September 2007.
We are transcribing and have translated what was said in that report about the dogs. We are doing that so the Portuguese readers and those who are fluent in Portuguese can correct our translation where we may have got it wrong.
Pages 2595 to 2600:
Portuguese: Mantendo, embora, em aberto vรกrias linhas de investigaรงรฃo foi decidido avanรงar na vertente de efectuar uma nova inspecรงรฃo ao local de onde desapareceu a menina. English: While keeping open various lines of investigation, it was decided to move in the way of doing a new inspection where the girl disappeared.
P: A tรฉcnica de inspecรงรฃo รฉ vulgarmente usada no Reino Unido e consiste na utilizaรงรฃo de dois cรฃes especialmente treinados E: The inspection technique is commonly used in the UK and consists in the use of two specially trained dogs.
P: Como รฉ natural o olfacto dos animais รฉ o ‘sentido’ usado. No caso deste ‘sentido’ a diferenรงa entre homem e cรฃo รฉ de 5 milhรตes de cรฉlulas para 200 milhรตes de cรฉlulas. E: It’s natural that the smell of animals is the 'sense' used. In the case of this 'sense' the difference between man and dog is 5 million cells to 200 million cells.
P: De salientar o facto de o recurso a este tipo de inspecรงรฃo, no UK, รฉ frequente e a percentagem de รชxito รฉ de cem por cento. E: It is noteworthy that recourse to this type of inspection is frequent in the UK and the success rate is of one hundred per cent.
P: Um dos cรฃes estรก treinado para detectar odor de cadรกver e o outro para identificar vestรญgios de sangue humano. E: One dog is trained to detect corpse odour and the other to identify vestiges of human blood.
P: Realรงamos neste momento que a localizaรงรฃo de odores de cadรกveres significa que fisicament o corpo (cadรกver) nรฃo se encontra no local, marcado pelo cรฃo, mas seguramente ali esteve, desde que o cรฃo o sinaliza. E: We emphasize at this point that the location of cadaver odours means that physically the body (corpse) is not in the location marked by the dog, but has certainly been there as long as the dog signals it.
P: Conforme se verifica dos respectivos autos, contantes do inquรฉrito os cรฃes efectuaram inspecรงรตes cinotรฉcnicas nos locais, abaixo, identificados e nos objectos descritos, com os resultados indicados. E: As can be seen from the respective files, that are constant of the inquiry the dogs performed cynotechnical inspections at the places identified below and on the objects described, with the results as indicated.
P: As inspecรงรตes foram todas gravadas em som e imagem e foram dirigidas pelos colegas ingleses que acompanham os cรฃes. E: The inspections were all recorded in sound and image and were conducted by the English colleagues accompanying the dogs.
P: Neste grande nรบmero de objectos e locais inpeccionados os cรฃes vieram a ter comportamento de identificaรงรฃo, “marcaรงรฃo”, nos seguintes locais e objectos: E: In this large number of objects and locations inspected, the dogs came to have behaviours of identification, “marking”, in the following places and objects:
P: 1. apartamento 5 A, rรฉsort do Ocean Club, local de onde desapareceu a menina 1.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver * no quarto do casal, num canto junto ao roupeiro * na sala de estar, por detrรกs do sofรก, junto da janela lateral do apartamento 1.2 cรฃo de sangue * na salade estar, por detrรกs do sofรก, junto da janela lateral do apartamento (exactamente o mesmo local assinalado pelo cรฃo que sinaliza odor de cadรกver); E: 1. apartment 5 A, Ocean Club resort, place from where the girl disappeared 1.1 cadaver odour dog * in the couple's room, in a corner next to the closet * in the living room, behind the sofa, by the side window of the apartment 1.2 blood dog * in the living room, behind the couch, by the side window of the apartment (exactly the same place signalled the dog that signals cadaver odour);
P: 2. zona de quintal fronteira ao apartmento 5 A: 2.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver * num dos canteiros, sendo comentado pelo treinador a ‘ligeireza’ do odor detectado. E: 2. backyard area bordering apartment 5 A: 2.1 cadaver odour dog * In one of the flowerbeds, having been commented by the trainer the 'lightness' of the odour detected.
P: 3. apartamentos onde estiveram hospedados os restantes elementos do GRUPO: * NADA foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes; E: 3. apartments where the remaining members of the GROUP were hosted: * NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs;
P: 4. casa actual (ร data) do casal McCann; * NADA foi detectado, na casa, por qualquer dos cรฃes. E: 4. current house (at the time) of the McCann couple; * NOTHING was detected in the house by any of the dogs.
P: 5. na localidade Aldeia da Luz: * NADA foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes. E: 5. in the village of Aldeia da Luz: * NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs.
P: 6. ร s roupas e pertences da famรญlia McCann; 6.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver: * em duas peรงas de roupa de Kate McCann * numa peรงa de roupa da menor Madeleine * ao peluche da menor Madeleine * foi detectado o odor a cadรกver, quando o peluche ainda se encontrava no interior da residรชncia (ร data da famรญlia) * foi confirmado em condiรงรตes fora da casa; E: 6. clothes and belongings of the McCann family; 6.1 cadaver odour dog: * in two pieces of clothing of Kate McCann * on a piece of clothing of the minor Madeleine * to the stuffed toy of the minor Madeleine * cadaver odour was detected when the stuffed toy was still inside the residence (at the time of the family) * was confirmed in conditions outside the house;
P: 7. o veรญculo usado pela famรญlia McCann: 7.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver: * marcou a chave do veรญculo; * marcou no interior da bagageira do veรญculo; 7.2 cรฃo de sangue * marcou a chave do veรญculo; * marcou no interior da bagageira do veรญculo; E: 7. The vehicle used by the McCann family: 7.1 cadaver odour dog: * marked the vehicle key; * marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle; 7.2 blood dog * marked the vehicle key; * marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle;
P: 8. veรญculo usado por um amigo da famรญlia, que esteve hospedado no mesmo aldeamento, coincidindo alguns dos dias: * NADA foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes; E: 8. vehicle used by a family friend who was staying in the same resort, coinciding some of the days: * NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs;
P: 9. todos os veรญculos usados pelo arguido Robert Murat e pessoas que lhe estรฃo prรณximas: * NADA foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes. E: 9. all vehicles used by the arguido Robert Murat and people close to him: * NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs.
P: (num total de dez veรญculos o cรฃo de odor a cadรกver e o de odor de sangue apenas fizeram marcaรงรฃo no veรญculo da famรญlia Mccann, alugado a 27 de Maio!!!) E: (out of a total of ten vehicles the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour one only marked the Mccann family vehicle, rented on May 27 !!!)
P: Os locais e peรงas marcados e sinalizados pelo cรฃo de sangue encontram-se a ser sujeitas ร realizaรงรฃo de exames, parte dos quais se encontram concluรญdos. E: The locations and objects marked and signalled by the blood dog are undergoing exams, some of which are concluded.
P: Nรฃo menos relevante se torna o apuramento dos resultados que apontam ADN da Madaleine como presente no local do apartamento 5 A, por detrรกs do sofรก, local marcado pelo cรฃo de sangue. Em todos os locais marcados pelo cรฃo de sangue o laboratรณrio veio a confirmar existir ADN. E: No less relevant becomes the determination of results that point to Madeleine’s DNA as present at the location of apartment 5 A, behind the couch, location marked by the blood dog. At all sites marked by the blood dog the laboratory has confirmed the existence of DNA.
(…)
P: Quando a comunicaรงรฃo social informou que tinha sido ‘detectado sangue no carro e no apartmento’ a Kate e membros da famรญlia vieram a pรบblico com a desculpa simples de ter sido alguรฉm, com acesso ao apartmento, a colocar as provas. E: When the media reported that 'blood was detected in the car and apartment', Kate and members of the family went publicly with the simple excuse that someone with access to the apartment was placing the evidence.
P: Agora admitem mesmo ter sido รณrgรฃo de investigaรงรฃo criminal a colocar provas ‘falsas’ (sangue e odor de cadรกver no apartmento e veรญculo) E: Now they even admit having been the criminal investigative body to place 'false' evidence (blood and cadaver odour in the apartment and vehicle)
P: A Kate, na tentativa de justificaรงรฃo de sangue terรก ido mais longe, informando, nessa ocasiรฃo que, a Madeleine tinha, por vezes, hemorragias nasais. E: Kate, in an attempt to justify blood, would have gone further, reporting on that occasion that Madeleine sometimes had nosebleeds.
(…)
P: Verifica-se coincidรชncia entre a inalizaรงรฃo de odor a cadรกver e sangue conforme o Relatรณrio Laboratorial (parcial) jรก junto aos Autos. E: There is a coincidence between the signalling of the cadaver odour and blood according to the (partial) Laboratory Report already in the file.
P: Tal sinalizaรงรฃo, ocorreu por detrรกs do sofรก da sala (odor de cadรกver / sangue / ADN) e que indubitavelment prova que tal mรณvel foi obviamente encostado por alguรฉm, apรณs a verificaรงรฃo da morte de Madeleine McCann. Face aos pouco indรญcios recolhidos no local e sujeitos a exame, รฉ de admitir a forte hipรณtese de ter o mesmo sido sujeito a “lavagem” no momento seguinte ร ocorrรชncia da morte; E: Such signalling occurred behind the living room couch (corpse / blood / DNA odour) and it undoubtedly proves that such piece of furniture was obviously moved against the wall by someone after the verification of the death of Madeleine McCann. Given the little evidence collected on the spot and subject to examination, it is to admit the strong possibility of it having been subjected to “washing” in the moment following the occurrence of death;
P: De igual modo, o peluche utilizado pela menina morta, encontrado ร cabeceira da cama onde normalmente dormia (vide fotos de inspecรงรฃo inicial) revela que alguรฉm ali colocou em momento posterior ร morte, uma vez que a prรณpria cama nada tem de odor a cadรกver. Isto รฉ, ocorreu uma modificaรงรฃo intencional, no sentido de simular um quadro nรฃo correspondente ร realidade, numa tentativa de aproveitamento para a simulaรงรฃo de quadro de rapto; E: Similarly, the stuffed toy used by the dead girl, found at the head of the bed where she normally slept (see photos of initial inspection) reveals that someone put it there in a moment after the death, since the bed itself in nothing has cadaver odour. That is, there was an intentional modification in order to simulate a picture that doesn’t correspond to reality, in an attempt to exploit the simulation of the abduction framework;
P: Acrescenta-se ainda que o cรฃo de odor a cadรกver sinalizou fortemente o quarto onde o casal Mccann dormia, o que pode indicar a deslocaรงรฃo do corpo do local da morte (sala de estar), para zona nรฃo vรญsivel em tal quarto; E: One should add that cadaver odour dog signalled strongly the room where the Mccann couple slept, which may indicate the displacement of the body from the place of death (living room) to an unseen area in said room;
P: Acresce que uma nova forte marcaรงรฃo de odor de cadรกver fori efectuada em roupas de Kate McCann, o que pode indiciar que a mesma esteve em contacto com o cadรกver. E: In addition, a strong new marking of cadaver odour was made on Kate McCann's clothing, which may indict that she was in contact with the corpse.
P: Igualmente existe forte marcaรงรฃo de odor de cadรกver no carro utilizado pelo casal McCann (desde 27 de Maio de 2007), o que conjugado com a marcaรงรฃo de cรฃo de sangue e fundamentado em analรญses laboratoriais, constantes nos Autos que indicam a presenรงa de ADN da menor Madeleine McCann na bagageira da viatura, sรฃo de forma a nรฃo excluir a forte hipรณtese que esta viatura possa ter sido utilizada para um eventual translado do cadรกver, apรณs 24 dias da ocorrรชncia da morte. E: There is equally a strong marking of cadaver odour on the car used by the McCann couple (since May 27, 2007), which in conjunction with the marking of the blood dog and based on laboratory analysis contained in the file that indicate the presence of DNA of the minor Madeleine McCann in the boot of the vehicle, are so as not to exclude the strong hypothesis that this vehicle may have been used for a possible transfer of the body, 24 days after the occurrence of the death.
P: Nรฃo รฉ de desprezar a indicaรงรฃo do cรฃo de odor de cadรกver, bem como do cรฃo de sangue, na chave do veรญculo atrรกs referido, vindo o laboratรณrio a confirmar a existรชncia de ADN de Gerald McCann. Acrescenta-se que esta รบltima sinalizaรงรฃo foi conseguida apรณs a chave ter sido colocada longe do veรญculo e em local nรฃo visรญvel. E: It is not to be disregarded the indication of the cadaver dog, as well as the blood dog, on the vehicle key mentioned before, having the laboratory come to confirm the existence of Gerald McCann's DNA. In addition, this signalling was achieved after the key was placed away from the vehicle and in place that was not visible.
*****
This report was in September, about a month after the canine diligences took place.
There is not a minimal hint or implication that Eddie is a blood dog. In fact, the report makes it perfectly clear that the 2 dogs have distinct skillsets and missions:
“One dog is trained to detect corpse odour and the other to identify vestiges of human blood.”
It does not say anywhere, that Keela corroborates Eddie’s alerts. Eddie alerts to cadaver scent and Keela to blood scent.
Throughout the report Eddie is referred to as the “cadaver odour dog” and Keela as the “blood dog”.
No mention whatsoever of Eddie being a possible cross-trained dog. Nor even a hint of that possibility.
We imagine that when this report was written up, due to the importance and international visibility of the case, it was done in a close coordination between the PJ and Martin Grime.
That means that if any of Eddie’s alerts to locations/objects also alerted to by Keela could be just tha of blood, that would have to have been mentioned to the PJ in this report. It is not.
At the moment when the ENTIRE world was focused on Portugal and on this case in particular, was the PJ wrong about Eddie?
The only other explanation other than Eddie NOT being a blood dog, would be for at this point time Martin Grime be withholding this crucial piece of information from the PJ.
And then there’s this: “There is equally a strong marking of cadaver odour on the car used by the McCann couple (since May 27, 2007), which in conjunction with the marking of the blood dog…”
https://mobile.twitter.com/McCannCaseTweet/status/1194120779283042304 McF seems to be agreeing that there was an alert to cadaver odour in the car. No suggestion it could be blood. Why can’t these people adopt a consistent position and decide which side of the fence to come down on? McF used to say neglect was the Mcs alibi, then changed her tune.
As we said in our comment at 15 Nov 2019, 21:32:00, the PJ gives its opinion about the dogs in 2 separate occasions.
The first, which we have transcribed and translated in that comment was via Tavares de Almeida in the interim report. This report was written before Martin Grime’s rogatory.
The second time the PJ gives its opinion on the dogs is in the final report. Obviously after Martin Grime’s rogatory, which, obviously again, is in the files which are attached to this final report.
We have done with the final report the same that we did with the interim one, which was to transcribe the Portuguese and follow it with our translation:
PORTUGUESE: Serรก agora abordada a questรฃo relativa ร actuaรงรฃo dos canรญdeos britรขnicos e consequente qualidade assumida pelos pais de MADELEINE, mais uma vez sem prejuรญzo de retomar a restante descriรงรฃo mais adiante. OUR TRANSLATION: It will now be addressed the issue of the performance of British canids and the consequent quality of assumed by MADELEINE's parents, once again without hindering the retaking of the rest of the description ahead.
PORTUGUESE: Deste modo, a fls. 1989 e seguintes, poder-se-รก ler um relatรณrio elaborado por MARK HARRISON, cuja especialidade รฉ a busca de pessoas, desaparecidas ou vรญtimas de homicรญdio, inclusive em cenรกrios de catรกstrofe. Alertou para a utillizaรงao de valรชncias caninas, especializados em detecรงรฃo de vestรญgios hemรกticos humanos e odor cadavรฉrico, tambรฉm humano. OUR TRANSLATION: Thus, pgs. 1989 et seq., it can be read a report by MARK HARRISON, whose speciality is the search for people, missing or victims of homicide, including in disaster scenarios. He alerted to the use of canine valences, specialized in the detection of human hematic vestiges and cadaveric odour, also human.
PORTUGUESE: Trata-se de uma tรฉcnica de inspecรงรฃo vulgarmente usada no Reino Unido, frequentemente com resultados positivos consistindo na utilizaรงao de dois cรฃes especialmente treinados. OUR TRANSLATION: It’s a commonly used inspection technique in the United Kingdom, often with positive results consisting of the use of two specially trained dogs.
PORTUGUESE: Um dos cรฃes estรก treinado para detectar odor de cadรกver e o outro, para identificar vestรญgios de sangue humano, havendo conhecimento que a sua utilizaรงao anterior proporcionara resultados significativos, nomeadamente na detecรงรฃo de tais vestรญgios, os quais haviam sido, apรณs, confirmados laboratorialmente. OUR TRANSLATION: One of the dogs is trained to detect cadaver odour and the other to identify vestiges of human blood, knowing that their previous use has provided significant results, namely in detecting such vestiges, which were later confirmed in a laboratory.
PORTUGUESE: Apรณs consulta e obtencรฃo de parecer positivo junto da policia britรขnica, optou-se por recorrer a esta valรชncia, foram examinados um grande nรบmero de objectos e locais, tendo tais diligรชncias sido reportadas atravรฉs de filmagens que se encontram juntas aos autos. OUR TRANSLATION: After consultation and obtaining a positive feedback from the British police, it was decided to resort to this valence, a large number of objects and locations were examined, having such diligences being reported through filming that are attached to the file.
PORTUGUESE: A visualizaรงรฃo de tais filmagens afigura-se essencial para compreender, mais do que quaiquer palavras, a actuaรงรฃo e a sinalizaรงรฃo dos canรญdeos (v. suportes digitais constantes do Apenso III). OUR TRANSLATION: Viewing such footage appears to be essential to the understanding, more than any words, of the performance and signalling of canids (see digital media in Apenso III).
PORTUGUESE: Nalguns desses locais e objectos, os animais vieram a ter comportamento de identificaรงรฃo e sinalizaรงรฃo, a saber: OUR TRANSLATION: In some of these locations and objects, the animals came to have an identification and signalling behaviour, to be known:
PORTUGUESE: 1. Apartamento 5 A, rรฉsort do “Ocean Club”, local de onde desapareceu a crianรงa 1.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver * no quarto do casal, num canto junto do roupeiro * na sala de estar, por detrรกs do sofรก, junto da janela lateral do apartamento 1.2 cรฃo de sangue * na salade estar, por detrรกs do sofรก, junto da janela lateral do apartamento (exactamente o mesmo local assinalado pelo cรฃo que sinaliza odor de cadรกver); OUR TRANSLATION: 1. Apartment 5 A, Ocean Club resort, place from where the child disappeared 1.1 cadaver odour dog * in the couple's room, in a corner next to the closet * in the living room, behind the sofa, by the side window of the apartment 1.2 blood dog * in the living room, behind the couch, by the side window of the apartment (exactly the same place signalled the dog that signals cadaver odour);
PORTUGUESE: 2. Zona de quintal, fronteira ao apartmento 5 A: 2.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver * num dos canteiros, sendo comentado pelo tratador a ligeireza do odor detectado. OUR TRANSLATION: 2. Backyard area, bordering apartment 5 A: 2.1 cadaver odour dog * In one of the flowerbeds, having been commented by the handler the lightness of the odour detected.
PORTUGUESE: 3. Apartamentos onde estiveram hospedados os restantes elementos do grupo: * nada foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes; OUR TRANSLATION: 3. Apartments where the remaining members of the group were hosted: * nothing was detected by any of the dogs;
PORTUGUESE: 4. Habitaรงรฃo, ร data da inspecรงรฃo do casal McCANN; * nada foi detectado, na casa, por qualquer dos cรฃes. OUR TRANSLATION: 4. Residence, at the time of the inspection, of the McCANN couple; * nothing was detected in the house by any of the dogs.
PORTUGUESE: 5. Na localidade Aldeia da Luz: * nada foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes. OUR TRANSLATION: 5. In the village of Aldeia da Luz: * nothing was detected by any of the dogs.
PORTUGUESE: 6. Na roupas e pertences da famรญlia McCANN; 6.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver: * em duas peรงas de roupa de KATE HEALY * numa peรงa de roupa da menor MADELEINE * possivelmente, no peluche da menor MADELEINE (foi detectado o odor a cadรกver, quando o peluche ainda se encontrava no interior da residรชncia (ร data ocupada pela famรญlia) * foi confirmado a sinalizaรงรฃo em cenรกrio exterior da casa; OUR TRANSLATION: 6. In the clothes and belongings of the McCANN family; 6.1 cadaver odour dog: * in two pieces of clothing of KATE HEALY; * on a piece of clothing of the minor MADELEINE * to the stuffed toy of the minor MADELEINE (cadaver odour was detected when the stuffed toy was still inside the residence (at the time occupied by the family) * the signalling was confirmed in a scenario in the exterior of the house;
PORTUGUESE: 7. No veรญculo usado pela famรญlia McCANN: 7.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver: * marcou a chave do veรญculo; 7.2 cรฃo de sangue * marcou a chave do veรญculo; * marcou no interior da bagageira do veรญculo; OUR TRANSLATION: 7. In the vehicle used by the McCANN family: 7.1 cadaver odour dog: * marked the vehicle key; 7.2 blood dog * marked the vehicle key; * marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle;
PORTUGUESE: 8. No veรญculo usado por um amigo da famรญlia, que esteve hospedado no mesmo aldeamento, coincidindo alguns dos dias: * nada foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes; OUR TRANSLATION: 8. In the vehicle used by a family friend who was staying in the same resort, coinciding some of the days: * nothing was detected by any of the dogs;
PORTUGUESE: 9. Em todos os veรญculos usados pelo arguido ROBERT MURAT e pessoas que lhe estรฃo prรณximas: * nada foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes. OUR TRANSLATION: 9. In all vehicles used by the arguido ROBERT MURAT and people close to him: * nothing was detected by any of the dogs.
PORTUGUESE: (num total de dez veรญculos, o cรฃo de odor de cadรกver e de odor de sangue, apenas fizeram sinalizaรงao no veiculo da famรญlia McCANN, alugado a 27 de Maio) OUR TRANSLATION: (out of a total of ten vehicles, the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour one only made a signalling on the McCANN family vehicle rented on 27 May)
PORTUGUESE: Nos locais e peรงas marcados e sinalizados pelo cรฃo de sangue, foram realizados exames periciais, especialmente num credenciado laboratรณrio britรขnico (Forensic Science Service - v. Apensos I e VII — Relatรณrio final dos FSS) mas, tambรฉm, alguns deles, no (v. Apenso I), cujos resultados finais nรฃo vieram corroborar as marcaรงรตes caninas, ou seja, foi recolhido material celular, que, todavia, nรฃo foi identificado como pertencente a alguรฉm em concreto, nรฃo tendo sido possivel apurar a qualidade desse material (v.g. se poderia ser sangue ou outro tipo de fluido corporal). OUR TRANSLATION: At the locations and pieces marked and signalled by the blood dog, expert examinations were carried out, especially in an accredited British laboratory (Forensic Science Service - see Apensos I and VII - Final Report of the FSS) but, also, some of them at the Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal (see Apenso I), whose final results did not corroborate the canine markings, that is, cellular material was collected, which, however, was not identified as belonging to someone in concrete, and it was not possible to ascertain the quality of that material. (e.g. if it could be blood or other body fluid).
PORTUGUESE: Todavia, numa primeira abordagem cientรญfica (fls. 2617 e s.s.), afigurou-se a possibilidade de compatibilizaรงรฃo do perfil de ADN da MADELEINE com alguns dos vestรญgios recolhidos (dos quais avultavam os existentes na viatura Renault Scenic alugada pelo casal McCANN), compatibilizaรงรฃo essa, como se constata pelo supra mencionado relatรณrio final dos FSS, que nรฃo se veio — apรณs a realizaรงao de longos e complexos exames – a verificar. OUR TRANSLATION: However, in a first scientific approach (pages 2617 et seq.), there appeared to be the possibility of a match between the DNA profile of MADELEINE with some of the collected vestiges (of which largely were from the Renault Scenic vehicle rented by the McCANN couple), a match which, as can be seen in the above-mentioned FSS final report, did not come – after long and complex examinations – to be verified.
PORTUGUESE: A fls. 2461 e s.s., procedeu-se ร junรงรฃo da traduรงรฃo dos comentรกrios efectuados pelo tratador cinรณfilo, aquando dos actos inspectivos. OUR TRANSLATION: At pgs. 2461 et seq., it was appended the translation of the comments made by the cynophile handler, during the inspective acts.
PORTUGUESE: Com base na actuaรงรฃo da equipa cinotรฉcnica e da supra referida primeira abordagem cientรญfica, indiciadoras da eventualidade de existรชncia de cadรกver no apartamento e na viatura utilizada pela famรญlia MCCANN, e a fim de permitir que GERALD McCANN e KATE HEALY pudessem ver salvaguardada a sua posiรงรฃo processual, os mesmos, ao abrigo das disposiรงรตes processuais penais entรฃo vigentes, vieram a ser constituรญdos arguidos, face ร mera possibilidade do seu envolvimento com o eventual cadรกver. No decurso do interrogatรณrio como arguidos, alijaram qualquer responsabilidade no desaparecimento da filha. OUR TRANSLATION: E: Based on the action of the cynotechnic team and the abovementioned first scientific approach, indicating the existence of a cadaver in the apartment and the car used by the McCANN family, and in order to allow GERALD McCANN and KATE HEALY to have safeguarded their procedural positions, they, under the then existing criminal procedural provisions, were made arguidos in view of the mere possibility of their involvement with the possible cadaver. In the course of their interrogation as defendants, they have been held responsible for the disappearance of their daughter.
*****
Both reports detail the alerts. It’s interesting to compare what is said in the Interim report (before Grime’s rogatory) with what is said in the final one (after Grime’s rogatory):
INTERIM REPORT: 1. apartment 5 A, Ocean Club resort, place from where the girl disappeared 1.1 cadaver odour dog * in the couple's room, in a corner next to the closet * in the living room, behind the sofa, by the side window of the apartment 1.2 blood dog * in the living room, behind the couch, by the side window of the apartment (exactly the same place signalled the dog that signals cadaver odour); FINAL REPORT: 1. Apartment 5 A, Ocean Club resort, place from where the child disappeared 1.1 cadaver odour dog * in the couple's room, in a corner next to the closet * in the living room, behind the sofa, by the side window of the apartment 1.2 blood dog * in the living room, behind the couch, by the side window of the apartment (exactly the same place signalled the dog that signals cadaver odour);
***** INTERIM REPORT: 2. backyard area bordering apartment 5 A: 2.1 cadaver odour dog * In one of the flowerbeds, having been commented by the trainer the 'lightness' of the odour detected. FINAL REPORT: 2. Backyard area, bordering apartment 5 A: 2.1 cadaver odour dog * In one of the flowerbeds, having been commented by the handler the lightness of the odour detected.
***** INTERIM REPORT: 3. apartments where the remaining members of the GROUP were hosted: * NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs; FINAL REPORT: 3. Apartments where the remaining members of the group were hosted: * nothing was detected by any of the dogs;
***** INTERIM REPORT: 4. current house (at the time) of the McCann couple; * NOTHING was detected in the house by any of the dogs. FINAL REPORT: 4. Residence, at the time of the inspection, of the McCANN couple; * nothing was detected in the house by any of the dogs.
***** INTERIM REPORT: 5. in the village of Aldeia da Luz: * NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs. FINAL REPORT: 5. In the village of Aldeia da Luz: * nothing was detected by any of the dogs.
***** INTERIM REPORT: 6. clothes and belongings of the McCann family; 6.1 cadaver odour dog: * in two pieces of clothing of Kate McCann * on a piece of clothing of the minor Madeleine * to the stuffed toy of the minor Madeleine * cadaver odour was detected when the stuffed toy was still inside the residence (at the time of the family) * was confirmed in conditions outside the house; FINAL REPORT: 6. In the clothes and belongings of the McCANN family; 6.1 cadaver odour dog: * in two pieces of clothing of KATE HEALY; * on a piece of clothing of the minor MADELEINE * possibly, to the stuffed toy of the minor MADELEINE (cadaver odour was detected when the stuffed toy was still inside the residence (at the time occupied by the family) * the signalling was confirmed in a scenario in the exterior of the house;
***** INTERIM REPORT: 7. The vehicle used by the McCann family: 7.1 cadaver odour dog: * marked the vehicle key; * marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle; 7.2 blood dog * marked the vehicle key; * marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle; FINAL REPORT: 7. In the vehicle used by the McCANN family: 7.1 cadaver odour dog: * marked the vehicle key; 7.2 blood dog * marked the vehicle key; * marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle;
***** INTERIM REPORT: 8. vehicle used by a family friend who was staying in the same resort, coinciding some of the days: * NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs; FINAL REPORT: 8. In the vehicle used by a family friend who was staying in the same resort, coinciding some of the days: * nothing was detected by any of the dogs;
***** INTERIM REPORT: 9. all vehicles used by the arguido Robert Murat and people close to him: * NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs. FINAL REPORT: 9. In all vehicles used by the arguido ROBERT MURAT and people close to him: * nothing was detected by any of the dogs.
INTERIM REPORT: (out of a total of ten vehicles the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour one only marked the Mccann family vehicle, rented on May 27 !!!) FINAL REPORT: (out of a total of ten vehicles, the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour one only made a signalling on the McCANN family vehicle rented on 27 May)
*****
As can be seen, the text was clearly revised and it did include some relevant changes: the alert that did not exist by Eddie inside the boot of the Scenic was removed, the wording of the alert to the cuddle-cat was changed and the word “possibly” was added, the ‘lightness’ of the alert on the flowerbed became lightness and the 3 exclamation marks about the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour only signalling the Scenic were removed.
The text was clearly revised, but there is not a minimal hint or implication that Eddie is a blood dog. In fact, the report makes it perfectly clear that the 2 dogs have distinct skillsets and missions:
“One of the dogs is trained to detect cadaver odour and the other to identify vestiges of human blood”
Like in the Interim report it does not say anywhere, that Keela corroborates Eddie’s alerts. Eddie alerts to cadaver scent and Keela to blood scent.
Throughout the final report Eddie is referred to as the “cadaver odour dog” and Keela as the “blood dog”.
No mention whatsoever of Eddie being a possible cross-trained dog. Nor even a hint of that possibility.
Nor a hint of the possibility that any of Eddie’s alerts to locations/objects also alerted to by Keela could be just that of blood, and we are certain that if that was the case, it would have to be mentioned, without any doubt.
So, AFTER Martin Grime’s words in the translated rogatory, the PJ CLEARLY maintains its opinion that Eddie is ONLY a cadaver dog.
No genuine McCann troll would speak about @LoverandomIeigh in such a dirty, misogynistic manner, so is Zora McCartney telling the truth about @TrollbusterXXX being Ben Thompson? It would explain why @TrollBusterXXX is lying about Ponce being Francis Dunn or Rebecca Dunn, and why Erica Jane and Jules have no problem chatting with him.
Another haggard anti #McCann female. All that hatred taken it toll. Katie Hopkins forced to sell £1m home and and now rents after cringe libel loss Racist Katie Hopkins moaned that speaking her mind lost her her career after she lost a £500,000 legal case to the writer Jack Monroe mirror.co.uk Belfast Banshee @ericajane1980 · 3h Wow such bitterness and nastiness from such an old lady, little wonder Isabelles acupuncturist made that remark about your wrinkle creased mouth, happy Sunday Sunbeam #McCann troll venting her true colours Steven Hamilton @TrollBusterXXX Replying to @ericajane1980 and @LoverandomIeigh Could the acupuncturist find a spot where a prick hadn’t been? 12:00 PM · Nov 17, 2019·Twitter for iPhone Belfast Banshee @ericajane1980 · 3h Replying to @TrollBusterXXX and @LoverandomIeigh With your mate Rebecca and 5 being the magic number I doubt not lol
Speaking of priceless, your comment is truly a Mona Lisa of comments.
True, the PJ didn’t have experience of these dogs, and having come from the UK, it would be really odd if they did.
But they did have someone at their disposal who did have that experience: Martin Grime.
He was the subject matter expert but he worked for an investigative body in that particular investigation, which was the PJ.
Are you suggesting that the PJ decided for themselves, without asking Martin Grime exactly what each dog alerted to, what each alert meant, and just wrote whatever it came to their mind about the dogs?
That’s why they posed the questions for Grime to answer in his rogatory interview, which didn’t subsequently alter the conclusions of the interim report.
Exactly the point - because they lacked experience but accompanied Grime on his inspections, they would surely have asked him what conclusions he reached after his dogs alerted and what they could rely on their alerts – Eddie as a cadaver dog and Keela as a blood one – to build the case against the McCann.
Your comment calls into question the professionalism and intelligence of all the PJ officers accompanying Martin Grime and the professionalism and intelligence of Martin Grime who, according to you on seeing the alerts of his dog Eddie being distorted into being uniquely a cadaver dog, just watched passively.
Did Grime warn the PJ that Eddie’s alerts behind the sofa and to the seal of the car door could be alerts to the blood of a LIVING person?
Did Paiva and other PJ officers disregard his warning?
Did Grime fail to warn the PJ of any provisos relating to the alerts?
Or, as we say, was there no need to give any warnings or provisos?
Grime warned the PJ, repeatedly, that no evidential reliance could be placed on any alert unless confirmed in the lab. Is it starting to sink in why that is? Because there is more than one interpretation, however desperate you are to convince people otherwise. Evidence has to be scrupulous and it has to be fair, otherwise false convictions can happen.
You can't possibly be that dense. If the dog alerts, but there is no lab confirmation, who is going to give evidence - the dog? No, the handler. And the handler stated that no evidential conclusion could be drawn from an unconfirmed alert. Do you think any prosecutor would put that to a jury? It seems you believe Grime only when it suits your narrative to do so.
We’ll start with your personal insult. We inform you that we have accepted it as evidence in the court of public opinion, as proof of admissibility on your part as having lost the argument.
Where did you get the “who is going to give evidence - the dog?” from? From the Clement Freud school of arguments to defend the McCanns? It sure looks like that way. And you do realise that when he used it, it sounded as pathetic as you are sounding now.
And one would even think that you were Turafftamer who is still trying to sell tickets for last week’s game:
https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1196192648354242562 Woger Wabbit @turaffetamer Replying to @SteMotson You thick tnuc. Again please do explain a false properly. Not a false alert. Dogs only alert to what they are trained to alert to and the SCENT OF CADAVAR CAN ONLY BE CORROBORATED BY BODY OR BODY PARTS. Eddie also alerted to blood and so some alerts were corroborated by keela 10:25 PM - 17 Nov 2019
The handler, in this case Martin Grime, states what falls within his area of expertise. What he cannot do is to determine what other experts, in this case in particular the courts of law, will decide.
What Grime said, and evidently you are twisting to fit your narrative, is that no evidential conclusion from a cadaver alert can be drawn to identify a body without forensic confirmation and that his is opinion.
Now, what he didn’t say is that no evidential conclusion can be drawn from a canine cadaver alert to determine that a body was present. That conclusion can be taken and WAS taken by the Portuguese justice system. If you have any questions please address them to your friend JBLittlemore who we have educated twice, if memory doesn’t fail us, on the subject and of course you are free to say as he did that you don’t care what the PT courts say.
This means that PT courts took as evidential conclusion that Eddie alerted to a cadaver both in the apartment and the Scenic, and that PROVEN FACT was uncontested by the McCanns. What the Portuguese didn’t do, was to take the alert as the evidential conclusion that it was Maddie, due to the lack of forensic corroboration.
Evidential conclusion from the forensically uncorroborated canine cadaver alert: PROVEN that there had been a cadaver in the Scenic and in the apartment; NOT PROVEN that is was Maddie. So much for Turaffetamer’s “SCENT OF CADAVAR CAN ONLY BE CORROBORATED BY BODY OR BODY PARTS”, he’s as right about this as he is about Praia da Luz having a crematorium in the church.
About forensically uncorroborated canine cadaver alerts not being admissible as evidential evidence, we would say that recent court cases are proving Martin Grime’s assessment wrong, as cadaver dog evidence is being admitted.
We believe that Martin Grime spoke out of his experience and his intention was to be helpful (basically saying, according to my experience please take into account that you need more than Eddie alerting to constitute proof that it is Maddie) but is not a legal expert.
In fact, due to the circumstantial evidence surrounding the alert, the Portuguese justice system could have decided to prosecute the McCanns just with the evidence that is on the files. It didn’t decide that way and we fully respect that decision, but we are highlighting that it was a subjective decision by someone with the appropriate legitimacy and qualification and who could have decided differently if they thought that the existing evidence would be enough to prosecute as the FSS did not clearly state that it was NOT Maddie.
The decision of what is admissible as evidence lies solely with the legal decider and not with the dog handler however much experience he may have.
The bit that you apparently can't get your head around even after all this time is that an alert to cadaver odour in the car still would not be proof that Madeleine had been transported in it. McCann family belongings were moved on it, some of which went on to give a positive alert.
Your attempts to rewrite history to your own interpretation, despite the testimony of Martin Grime, are just woeful.
If clothes caused the cadaver odour, what did Keela alert to in the boot of the car? Hardly likely the Mcs transported bloody clothing that left a deposit. Anything that incriminating would have been disposed of at the outset.
Cadaver scent comes from dead people not living and even if we were to stretch it to just being Maddies blood innocent parents would be beside themselves at the thought of their child being injured or even dead. None of this fits within the fairy tale of them stating in regular interviews they believed no harm had come to her, this theory simply doesn't wash as fear of the unknown where their child is concerned not only can drive them to drink but mentally break down. They've never once shown any real fear about their child being hurt or in danger and that is why they are despised so much.
So they ignored Martin Grime's words then? How very lax of your fellow countrymen. Still, not surprising, you do the same. Ignore the expert, and make it up as you go along. By the way, did it take you long to write all that? Nothing better to do? Nope? Thought not. When can we expect part 8 of you trying and failing to ever so desperately convince people of this lie that you've devoted so much of your life to? Will it be a very long and boring piece like everything else you ever wrote? I do hope so.
You are forgetting that Martin Grime watched the laxity of the fellow countrymen and has recently forgot to mention the possibility that Eddie's alert in the Scenic could only be blood in the recent Netflix documentary...
By the way, nice xenophobic remarks from someone who is supposedly supporting the PJ investigation...
Now insulting the Portuguese police again. Of course they would be aware the alerts needed to be confirmed by forensic testing, as samples were collected by the PJ under the supervision of a U.K. scientific adviser, Jonathan Smith.
It’s something about that car being used to transport a body which is causing concern to someone other than just the McCanns. Someone who is willing to concede there was cadaver odour in the car, but caused by contaminated clothing, not a body. Someone who accepts M died and that the McCann’s transported her clothing in the car, because it’s less damaging to than allowing for her body to have been transported in the car, for this person.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/115/9news_25_04_2017.htm Interesting article re Sandy Cameron. I don’t think this interview was included in Mark Saunokonoko’s broadcasts. Here Mark S refers to cadaver and blood dogs. No ref to Eddie being blood dog.
Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.
Please tell me why my following post of 29 October 17:56 has not appeared on the blog:
ReplyDeleteTaxtusa, T has commented @ 29 October 2019 at 11:02 on what you said.
http://cristobell.blogspot.com/2019/09/im-delighted-libdems-have-decided-on.html#comment-form
Anonymous 31 Oct 2019, 16:28:00,
DeleteWe believe we published your comment in previous post. We haven’t replied to it and we apologise for it, but as we have mentioned in regards to the Frog/blood/JBLittlemore debate, but life has presented us with priorities that supersede the blog.
We have 3 posts we intend to write and we’re not sure when we will be able to publish.
We think that you mean this:
“Anonymous29 October 2019 at 11:02
Anonymous25 October 2019 at 18:42
Thanks.
Textusa: “Our comment: Disagree. The fact that he [ M Grime T] mentions the possibility…”
What Grime mentions is not a possibility, it is an impossibility. That’s what’s important.
Textusa: “We think T and we agree on what matters: there was no DIFFUSION in that room.”
I don’t know how Textusa arrived at that conclusion, for It is the opposite of what I’d said It’s not a matter of my opinion, it’s physics.
Textusa: “Where Eddie alerted was where the source of the scent was…”
I have no doubt that’s what happened. There must have been a ‘source’ where he alerted. Why the ‘source’ happened to be where it was is another matter.
Textusa: “…we are talking about a strong scent.”
Yes, in the sense that it was strong enough for Eddie to alert. A great dog he was, bless him.
T”
*****
We can but ask if T is saying that this is a physics impossibility?
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-skX7s46zBgE/XYI1fhBJ_II/AAAAAAAASP0/8rbsJwCnZA44V4OJVy7JzXNvuHxJIKIbACLcBGAsYHQ/s400/blood%2B6%2B081.jpg
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-iH7zCJOVbe0/XYI2uSikgcI/AAAAAAAASP8/QWNqvkHiR8klBNfE_tKRSz-7n4pIETL2gCLcBGAsYHQ/s400/blood%2B6%2B080.jpg
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hnJaEnQmKaM/XYI90WY8s5I/AAAAAAAASQE/5rQuIleLOf0BiUmaIoZmC2LOqhpLyXRVQCLcBGAsYHQ/s400/blood%2B6%2B079.jpg
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-nlSsBTRlL0k/XYI_NbxOdhI/AAAAAAAASQM/rOFDxiTkH4soaSSF0MJVjSAK1r4c5n9pACLcBGAsYHQ/s400/blood%2B6%2B078.jpg
Thank you for your comment, Textusa. My comment in question is not in your previous post. I understand you are busy.
DeleteJBLIttlemore has finally replied to our challenge about his veiled accusation that we had said in the blog that he was Lowe:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190349035426779138
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @strackers74 @CarlaSpade
Ye gods! I'm not John Lowe. I'm not in any gang - insisting I am shows Carla's frail grasp on facts/reality. I didn't say Textusa said .. I said I recalled the Lowe connection emanated from Textusa's fold (as in 'Welcome to the fold' ie group, like minded - Whispering?) #Mccann
7:25 PM - 1 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190350172804567040
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @strackers74 @CarlaSpade
Also grateful if Carla drops the attacks and accusations I am lying. There was no calling out needed by you. I am just me, my own person, here for my own reason, not connected to or in/on any group/gang/page etc., and not willing or really able to be.
7:29 PM - 1 Nov 2019
So, according to himself, JBLittlemore is not part of the gang. Just takes digs against us for the pure pleasure it gives him.
Then there’s this lovely exchange between these 2 non-members of the gang:
https://twitter.com/The_Truth_II/status/1189581373079805952
The Ponce of Dubai @The_Truth_II
Replying to @JBLittlemore
the blog which many once read with interest has lost all its credibility & descended into a catalogue of abusing anybody & every body #puredrivel #curseoftrotters74
4:34 PM - 30 Oct 2019
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1189629994278047744
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @The_Truth_II
It is sad. There was some good research on there I found, whether verifiably correct or not. It was interesting & thought provoking. No more. It is just a well of bitterness & a mountain of demeaning abuse against anyone who doesn't agree with him.
7:47 PM - 30 Oct 2019
*****
We have been discussing the dogs and the blood. Evidently thinks that discussing it is not interesting or thought provoking. He was surprised we were still discussing it.
As a side-note, unless JBLIttlemore finds discussing the dogs and blood as a ”well of bitterness & a mountain of demeaning abuse against anyone who doesn't agree with him” then we haven’t exactly been that well.
And talking about the dogs and blood and wishing to be thought provoking, we wish to ask JBLittlemore a few questions.
We will give 4 examples of bloods. To each we would like to know JBLittlemore’s opinion about whether Keela and Eddie would or not alert to each. And he tell us briefly the reasons he thinks they would or would not.
Blood A: my blood, cut myself yesterday and let a drop fall on the floor, where it has been left exposed to the elements for the last 24 hours, decomposing.
Blood B: from a corpse on a crime scene, the murder happened 2 to 3 hours ago and when the police picked up the body to remove it from the scene, some blood dropped off the body and fell on the floor.
Blood C: blood B but 24 hours later. To be precise, blood that was inside a cadaver 2 to 3 hours after death, dripped off it and it has been left exposed to the elements for the last 24 hours, decomposing.
Blood D: during the autopsy, 2 days after death, some blood dripped on the floor when removing an internal organ. To be precise, blood that has decomposed together with the body for 48hours.
So JBlitlemore, for each one of the bloods above, would Eddie alert? Yes or no? If yes, why? If not, why?
Same thing for Keela.
Hope these questions are sufficiently thought provoking for you. We will be waiting for your response.
And to keep things fair, we will answer the questions ourselves. Not doing it now so as not to influence your answers.
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1190421515155709953
DeleteGreen Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @JBLittlemore @strackers74 @CarlaSpade
Tex has left some questions for you on their blog...the dastardly scoundrels are trying to trip you up. ☹
12:13 AM - 2 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190454663235198977
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @FragrantFrog @strackers74 @CarlaSpade
I just looked. I did not answer any challenge by the self obsessed soul as he suggests - I dealt with Carla's sniping tweets to Elaine by way of my reply. As to his blood questions - I'll wait for his answers, wearing only a smile in readiness! Good night.
2:24 AM - 2 Nov 2019
*****
As predictable as Big Ben, JBLittlemore hides in the bushes. It seems he prefers to “gossip” than to discuss relevant issues to the case.
And why are we dastardly scoundrels? Weren’t the questions completely and absolutely objective?
We looked for all possible examples and we even took into account JBLittlemore’s “blood also remains sterile for many hours within corpse - not 'afflicted' by decomp components in that time”.
Blood A – shed by a living human being, in no way 'afflicted' by decomp components and having decomposed on its own;
Blood B – freshly shed by a cadaver but not 'afflicted' by decomp components whilst inside the body;
Blood C – shed by a cadaver but not 'afflicted' by decomp components whilst inside the body and having decomposed on its own outside.
Blood D – shed by a cadaver and 'afflicted' by decomp components whilst inside the body.
Isn’t it important to know JBLittlemore’s opinion about how the dogs would react to each case? We think it is and we will provide our answers. If until then JBLittlemore doesn’t answer – as is his right – we will do so in a post.
In fact, we now see that there are 2 more possibilities that we have missed and that is between Blood A and Blood B. Both possibilities are of blood being shed by a recently deceased cadaver. We shall call them Blood A1 and Blood A2,
Blood A1 – freshly shed by a recently deceased cadaver (post mortem less than an hour), so not 'afflicted' by decomp components whilst inside the body;
Blood A2 – shed by a recently deceased cadaver (post mortem less than an hour), so not 'afflicted' by decomp components whilst inside the body but decomposed on its own outside.
We think with this 6 examples we have covered all possibilities. We would like to know what our critics believe each one of the dogs would react in each one of the cases.
Where on earth is this being dastardly or trying to trip anyone up? We don’t think we could be more transparent or objective.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190654064201273344
DeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
FollowFollow @JBLittlemore
More
#Mccann 1/2 Some brief but interesting information on 'cadaver dogs' detecting blood - https://www.staffs.ac.uk/assets/Simon%20Newbery_tcm44-19866.pdf
3:37 PM - 2 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190654553508761600
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
#Mccann 2/2 And more information (read to the bottom) relating to dogs detecting blood through stages of its degradation - https://www.staffs.ac.uk/assets/Simon%20Newbery_tcm44-19866.pdf
I will not engage in the petty game playing of Textusa & his challenges.
3:39 PM - 2 Nov 2019
Transcription of the document submitted by JBLittlemore:
DeleteA STUDY OF THE USE OF CADAVER DOGS FOR BLOOD SCENT DETECTION IN CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS
Newbery Simon and Dr J.P. Cassella Department of Forensic Science, Faculty of Science, Staffordshire University,
Introduction
Blood is one of the most important and often encountered types of physical evidence linked with the forensic investigation of death and violent crime Anecdotal evidence has suggested that dogs are capable of detecting and alerting to human blood. This evidence may be presented to a court of law in order to substantiate or corroborate further forensic evidence against a suspect or suspects of a crime. The main job of cadaver detection dogs (sometimes referred to as cadaver dogs or human remains detection HRD dogs or body dogs or more accurately Victim Remains Detection Dogs) is to search for hidden or buried human bodies or body parts, however more recently, a new aspect of cadaver detection work has been used in criminal investigations in which dogs are deployed to search for blood that has been in an area or on an object for various lengths of time and is in various stages of decomposition. A frequent problem in a murder investigation is the location and identification of objects, weapons and places associated with either the commission of the incident or the actual location of a victim's body. Dogs showing the capacity to detect human blood scent effectively and reliably can be used as an inexpensive screening test to assist the police in their investigations when looking for a weapon used in a crime for example or recovery of victims or perpetrators blood for DNA analysis or pin pointing crime scenes for the SOCO’s to focus upon.
Discussion
This project demonstrated the reliability of the dogs and the purposes to which they can be utilised in an ongoing investigation where detection of blood may be important. This project explored different scenarios in which the dogs may be utilised and showed that they can be reliably used indoor and outdoors and detect blood on a variety of surfaces and under different circumstances. In this project two handlers from South Yorkshire police dog unit were used along with their licenced and certified cadaver dogs. The findings showed that an experienced forensic search dog can detect blood that is day old through to months old. Dog 1 was a male Border collie and had been working for 7 years and dog 2 a male Springer spaniel aged had only few weeks experience. The two dogs, one novice and one veteran, used for victim remains detection, were used to detect small amounts of human blood on various surfaces; the lowest detectable amount of used in this study was 0.01ml of blood. The dogs were used in a line up and real life scenarios. Results indicated that the dogs can detect and alert to very small amounts of blood on different surfaces under various conditions. The data suggests that the potential error rate of both dogs and handlers were low and can be used in criminal cases to help other branches of forensic investigators to recover biological evidence. With an overall successful positive diagnostic ratio of id of blood scent of 17.5 for Frankie and a positive diagnostic ratio of 7.6 for Buster and with negative ratios of 38.5 and 16.4 respectively, it is clear that certain dogs have the ability to detect human blood scent in principal in both trial and scenario training. Any conclusions must be drawn carefully as by the nature of this project there were many limitations mainly due to lack of number of dogs to compare and the limitations of number of trials that could be done at any one time and within the overall time frame of this project.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190699531618471937
DeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
J B Littlemore Retweeted J B Littlemore
Apologies - wrong link in the previous tweet. This one – https://phys.org/news/2017-08-sniffing-crime-persons-science-blood-detection.html - this is the one to read to the bottom relating to blood detection by the dogs through its stages of degradation. #Mccann
J B Littlemore added,
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1190654553508761600
6:37 PM - 2 Nov 2019
From the pdf document submitted by JBLittlemore, there are 2 tables we think we should bring over to the blog:
DeleteTable #1: Materials and Methods
Team: Buster
Handler: PC Simone Thompson SYP
Handler Experience: Least experienced
Breed: Springer Spaniel
Sex: Male
Age: 2
Previous Training: Cadaver
Deployments: Few
Team: Frankie
Handler: PS John Ellis SYP
Handler Experience: Many years
Breed: Border Collie
Sex: Male
Age: 7
Previous Training: Cadaver & blood
Deployments: Many over last 7 years
*****
Table #2: Summary of results for square tests
Team: Frankie/John
Total trials: 3
Blood correctly identified: 3
Misses: 0
False positives: 0
Comments: 2 of these search areas contained articles with blood and one with blood on ground
Team: Buster/Simone
Total trials: 14
Blood correctly identified: 12
Misses: 1
False positives: 1
Comments: 2 of these searches were for blood on the ground rest were for blood on articles
*****
At bottom of page:
West Yorkshire Police
FIRN Midlands Regional Student Forensic Science Conference 2008
Staffordshire University
The second document submitted by JBLIttlemore:
Deletehttps://phys.org/news/2017-08-sniffing-crime-persons-science-blood-detection.html
Home/ Chemistry/ Analytical Chemistry
AUGUST 18, 2017
For sniffing out crime and missing persons, science backs blood-detection dogs
by Latara Rust And Shari Forbes, The Conversation
Picture: https://scx1.b-cdn.net/csz/news/800/2017/forsniffingo.jpg
Caption: Dogs can reliably sniff out human blood, even after two years of environmental degradation. Credit: Jason Korbol/shutterstock
It's difficult to contemplate the tragedy of losing a loved one and never knowing what happened to them.
Every year, an estimated 38,000 people go missing in Australia. While almost 95% of these individuals are found relatively quickly, 5% become long-term missing persons cases, with many suspected victims of foul play.
British toddler Madeleine McCann disappeared in 2007 on a family holiday in Portugal, and has never been found. Sniffer dogs in this case initially assisted in locating blood samples found in the holiday home.
However, the use of canines has attracted controversy due to misunderstandings about the sensitivity of dogs to reliably find evidence through scent at a crime scene.
But our recent research shows that for sniffing out blood, dogs are one of the best investigative screening tools for expediting crime scene searches.
Blood is important evidence
Locating blood at a crime scene is a vital step. It can assist in recreating the events of a crime, identifying victims or suspects, establishing secondary crime scenes, ascertaining potential murder weapons, and in identifying links between individuals with locations and objects.
The police employ various testing methods when processing a crime scene for blood evidence. Colour and chemical change tests are applied to indicate the possible presence of blood. A common example is luminol, which emits a bright blue colour when it reacts with haemoglobin (a molecule found in blood).
If positive results are achieved, areas of interest are then targeted for further processing with more specific tests to confirm the presence of human blood.
But the smell of blood can also be used to locate it at crime scenes. In recent years, several law enforcement agencies in Europe and Australia have introduced blood-detection dogs, which are trained specifically for blood evidence.
Picture: https://scx2.b-cdn.net/gfx/news/2017/1-forsniffingo.jpg
Caption: Luminol creates a blue glow when it reacts with haemoglobin, one of the molecules found in blood. Credit: Couperfield/shutterstock
By using this distinct dog unit, a large search area can be screened as a potential crime scene in cases of assault, missing persons, mass disasters or suspected homicides where a body may not be present.
Blood-detection dogs are a recently specialised unit under a broader grouping of scent-detection dogs used by law enforcement. The dogs' highly sensitive sense of smell can locate a range of target odours including drugs, explosives, human bodies (known as "cadavers") and now blood.
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteThe odour of death
Forensic odour profiling aims to unravel the chemical components of odour. Our research in this area focuses on the individual odour-producing constituents of blood, and explore how environmental changes can affect the ability of blood-detection dogs to detect these.
A scientific analysis of scent involves collecting the gases emitted from blood samples, and then separating the gaseous odour molecules (known as volatile organic compounds) to be individually detected and identified at trace levels.
Often searches are carried out a considerable time after the crime occurred. So in our first studies we compared the odour of fresh and degraded blood, chemically profiled over a two-year study and presented to cadaver-detection and blood-detection dogs in training. Degraded blood is defined as blood which has undergone decomposition through the breakdown of cellular material.
Preliminary results indicate that a distinct odour change occurs from blood collected within 48 hours to degraded, with the odour profile changing throughout the degradation process. Impressively, the canines which were mostly trained on fresh blood could locate blood confidently up to six months old, and had the ability to locate blood even as old as 24 months.
We've also established through this research that the surface on which the blood is deposited affects the odour produced by the blood. Blood left on porous surfaces (such as clothing) and blood on non-porous surfaces (such as metallic objects) produce unique odour profile patterns which are most apparent when the blood is freshly deposited.
It's important that blood-detection dogs are trained to reliably locate blood on any type of crime scene surface they could potentially encounter on the job.
https://youtu.be/3psY6GY-_ic
Caption: The Australian Facility For Taphonomic Experimental Research (AFTER) examines how bodies decompose under Australian conditions.
Blood is blood
A comparison of blood donors has also expanded our understanding of what human blood actually smells like: we refer to this as the "core odour profile of blood". Although much of the odour profile is consistent from individual to individual, some variations do occur linked with differing lifestyle, diet, health and other factors in the environment.
However, early results suggests this may have little effect on the canine's ability to locate fresh and degraded blood from different people.
We also compared the sensitivity of detecting latent blood – that is, blood that is invisible to the naked eye – by dogs as compared to other methods such as luminol.
We created an artificial scenario in which a suspect attempted to remove a victim's blood from clothing by washing it five times. Initial results indicate that the blood-detection and cadaver-detection dogs are much more sensitive than our current analytical detection approaches, but complementary to the use of luminol.
What happens to bodies after death
Our research into blood-detection by dogs is part of a broader program in forensic odour profiling and the science of body decomposition.
The first Australian Facility for Taphonomic Experimental Research (or AFTER) is now established. Collaborating with 13 partner organisations, ongoing research at this facility strengthens our understanding of how the human body decomposes, and ultimately will assist investigators in the search for human remains.
By investigating the odour profile of common training aids utilised by law enforcement we can provide important recommendations for the training of blood-detection and cadaver-detection dogs to ensure their success in the field.
Establishing a connection between science and law enforcement, we work hand in paw to provide justice for victims and bring closure for their families.
Comment received that we have censored:
Delete“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
So blood on a knife...would you class that as
"dead person blood" or "blood from a living person"?
(Censored)
(Censored)
(Censored)
(Censored)
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 3 Nov 2019, 02:50:00”
*****
It depends.
If, when the knife was introduced in the victim’s body the victim was alive or very recently deceased, it would be blood from a living person as it wasn’t yet 'afflicted' by decomp components.
If, when the knife was introduced in the body any time after 1.5 to 2 hours after death, it would be blood of a dead person because it had been 'afflicted' by decomp components, direct or indirectly.
If, this introduction was done before approximately 6 hours post-mortem, then this ‘affliction’ would be indirect, as although the blood remained sterile within corpse, on the way out ‘attached’ to the blade, it would come in contact with tissues of the body already ‘afflicted’ by decomp components, becoming contaminated.
If, this introduction was done after that time, then the ‘affliction’ by decomp components would be direct.
Hope to have replied.
For the love of God, stop with this train crash. This blog is without doubt the biggest shower of shit I have ever seen. It's badly written, badly constructed, factually incorrect, and it shows you have several personality disorders that cause you to act in an abnormal way.
ReplyDeleteYe gods! What a comment!
DeleteSupposing then that we were never thought provoking...
If it provokes such bitterness probably best you steer clear then.
Deletehttps://youtu.be/Ow0lr63y4Mw
ReplyDeleteCan I recommend this for the person needlessly persisting in reading the blog, despite the negative impact it’s having on this reader.
“Stop it!”
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191102243484946432
ReplyDeleteMs Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others
Oh dear. It is not 'live blood' Grime says 'blood from a live human being'. As soon as blood leaves the body it starts to decay. So there is no 'live blood' vs 'dead blood'....just blood. #mccann
9:17 PM - 3 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1190263950404927490
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others
Why do you continue to lie? Cadaver dogs are trained to indicate THE SCENT OF DEATH - not an individual amine and scientists NEVER said anything about individual amines in your source. You obviously know very little - can't even get right what's in your own sources. ๐ฌ#McCann
1:46 PM - 1 Nov 2019
*****
To CruftMs
‘Live blood’ is blood uncontaminated with the scent of death.
‘Dead blood’ is blood contaminated with the scent of death.
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191107446128939008
ReplyDeleteMs Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @BourgeoisViews @Esjabe1 and 4 others
This is really simple. ( not that you will be satisfied). EVRD dogs alert to blood AND corpses. If the EVRD dog alerts in the same place as the blood dog there was blood AND a body. Get it? ( I doubt it somehow )
9:38 PM - 3 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1191139223480479744
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @CruftMs @BourgeoisViews and 4 others
You're wrong. The VRD would alert to dried blood from a living human.
11:44 PM - 3 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Dex________x/status/1191140996563820544
Dex @Dex________x
FollowFollow @Dex________x
More
Replying to @FragrantFrog @CruftMs and 5 others
What’s the difference between dried blood from a dead person and dried blood from a live person ? >
11:51 PM - 3 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1191141801022898176
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Dex________x @CruftMs and 5 others
To a dog trained on uncontaminated dried blood - nothing.
11:55 PM - 3 Nov 2019
*****
Slowly we are getting there. So, to the Frog there is a training for contaminated blood and a training for uncontaminated blood.
Eddie was trained with contaminated blood, only reacts to that blood.
Keela was trained to blood in all its stages of decomposition, so can’t tell the difference between dead blood or live blood, as for her the scent of death the blood may or not contain, she ignores like she ignores all other scents.
Nobody has commented on the experiment with the blood from accident victims.
ReplyDeleteIf blood odour was the same from living or dead, what was the point of this experiment?
Food for thought:
ReplyDeleteIn JBLittmore’s pdf above, one dog, Buster, is said to have been previously trained in CADAVER while the other, Frankie, is said to have been in CADAVER & BLOOD.
This would mean that a cadaver and blood are separate trainings. And that a cadaver dog would only alert to blood if trained specifically for that effect.
However the pdf says that Buster alerted to blood. How is that possible?
Buster had 14 trials. 2 were blood on the ground, with the rest being blood on articles.
DeleteThere was 1 miss and 1 false alert.
We don’t know if the latter related to the 2 tests for blood on the ground or not.
Blood on the ground presumably wasn’t cadaver blood, but blood used for testing?
Was the blood on ARTICLES related to cadavers or not?
Without knowing the precise details of Buster’s alerts to blood, it’s only a possibility that Buster was alerting to cadaver odour on the articles.
If he alerted in all 12 situations and to ‘live’ blood, the question is why, if his training was as a cadaver dog, as opposed to Frankie, who was trained for both blood and cadaver.
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1191324411418288129
ReplyDeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @CruftMs @Esjabe1 and 4 others
There is, of course, the consideration that when Eddie was trained, the only blood permitted to be used was dried blood from live patient samples at Sheffield Haem dept.? No deceased body parts permitted for training in UK. #Mccann
12:00 PM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
JBLitllemore has now become the latest one who doesn’t trust the judgement of the British accreditation authorities.
“No deceased body parts permitted for training in UK” is absolutely true but that’s because the British accreditation authorities have deemed that uneviscerated piglet remains are the equivalent of “deceased body parts”.
So, using uneviscerated piglet remains, including blood, is the same, according to the British accreditation authorities as using human remains. Disagree? Take it up with the respective authorities.
The fact that “No deceased body parts permitted for training in UK” does not rule out that there are no certified EVR dogs in the UK. They are certified with uneviscerated piglet remains.
But wait a minute… if the EVR dog is trained with living human blood, as JBLIttlemore says they are, then why condition the EVR’s blood training to some rule set out to forbid the use of “deceased body part”? JBLittlemore just had to say that Eddie was trained with the same blood obtained from the same “Haem dept.” the blood to train Keela was obtained from, no?
Yet, JBLittlemore conditions the origins of the blood for Eddie’s training to that rule. Why this inconsistency?
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1191329060540030976
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @JBLittlemore and 5 others
I sense Tex's next move will be to claim Grime mixed the uncontaminated "fresh" blood with decomposing piglet parts....it's not over yet. ๐คฃ๐คฃ
12:19 PM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
Next move?
Frog, do pay attention and please make an effort to keep up with the rest of the class.
The only logical conclusion, if one believes Eddie alerts to blood from a living person, ( as Frog, JBL and others maintain) is that alerts by both dogs can only prove that any blood found was from a living person and that is what was found in the living room and in the car.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of internal locations, that leaves the closet as the only place where Eddie alerted and Keela didn’t.
What explanations have been given so far?
The contaminated soil and drifting odour solution.
Eddie made a false alerts to please his handler.
Eddie’s alerts to blood from the living has made it so much easier for Mc defenders, hasn’t it?
Anonymous 4 Nov 2019, 20:23:00,
DeleteAnd please don't forget JBLittlemore's assertion that Keela COULD (not did) have alerted to blood...
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1190957173540577280
ReplyDeleteMs Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others
No I don't know what you mean. Martin Grimes dogs are not trained to find 'live blood'...so what you are waffling on about is wrong...obviously that's why you need to resort to toddler level and start the name calling. Sad! #mccann #McCann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIchLsTWkAA3PAQ.png
11:41 AM - 3 Nov 2019
[The picture attached is a screengrab of the famous paragraph of the translation of the translation as per McCannPJFiles. Our caps to highlight what CruftMs has highlighted in it:
“'The dog EVRD also alerts to blood from a live human being or only from a cadaver'
The dog EVRD is trained using whole and disintegrated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and decomposed cross-contaminants. THE DOG WILL RECOGNIZE ALL OR PARTS OF A HUMAN CADAVER. HE IS NOT TRAINED FOR 'LIVE' HUMAN ODOURS; NO TRAINED DOG WILL RECOGNIZE THE SMELL OF 'FRESH BLOOD'. THEY FIND, HOWEVER, AND GIVE THE ALERT FOR DRIED BLOOD FROM A LIVE HUMAN BEING.”]
Tweet liked by:
00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
SheLLxx ©Shellyphant ๐ญ ๐ฆ ๐E ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ㊙ ๐ช ❓ ๐ค @xxSiLverdoexx
Babs1 @Babs108164110
Velma Dinkley @VelmaDi42614172
1 user has asked not to be shown
*****
CruftMs,
No, no and NO!
You are only supposed to highlight “they find, however, and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being” and NOT the phrase “THE DOG WILL RECOGNIZE ALL OR PARTS OF A HUMAN CADAVER. HE IS NOT TRAINED FOR 'LIVE' HUMAN ODOURS; NO TRAINED DOG WILL RECOGNIZE THE SMELL OF 'FRESH BLOOD'”.
Silly, silly you.
The first part was the question posed by the PJ and should therefore have a ? mark to denote it was a question put to Grime and not a statement of fact.
DeleteGrime then responds.
Anonymous 4 Nov 2019, 22:24:00,
DeleteExactly. As we have explained here:
https://textusa.blogspot.com/2019/06/blood-and-evrd-dog-part-3.html
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1191471136917348354
ReplyDeleteGreen Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @DaniellSimone @CruftMs and 4 others
There's a 1 in 20 chance the dogs were wrong on every alert. Russian Roulette with a little girl's fate & her parents' destiny.
9:43 PM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191471876301885441
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @FragrantFrog @DaniellSimone and 4 others
Why 1 in 20?
9:46 PM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1191474307903508480
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @CruftMs @DaniellSimone and 4 others
5 times out of 100 they are wrong.
9:56 PM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
Do readers remember the conversation between the Rat and the Frog where they tried to instil doubt on the dogs’ reliability by using specious and unclear statistics?
Well, we have warned that it would be used against the dogs…
Oh, and talking about the Rat, guess who loved the Rat?
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1164444789170987013
00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx
Replying to @LoverandomIeigh @_Babalou_ and 12 others
The Rat was brilliant.. I loved the Rat.. ๐
But then so did Snips, in a more creepy way..
8:50 AM - 22 Aug 2019
This tweet was liked by
carole S @carmarsutra
Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer
Ness ๐ ๐ ๐คฉ @nessiestressy
Babs1 @Babs108164110
SheLLxx ©Shellyphant ๐ญ ๐ฆ ๐E ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ㊙ ๐ช ❓ ๐ค @xxSiLverdoexx
To be clear and to sum up what we have learned from JBLittlemore and the Frog:
ReplyDeleteJBLittlemore says that there are a few hours post-mortem that the blood inside the corpse is not afflicted by decomp components. That means, according to JBLIttlemore, that after those hours, it is.
Martin Grime, we suppose knows that a cadaver has, after a few hours, blood that is afflicted by decomp components or as the Frog calls it, contaminated blood.
But because in the UK no deceased body parts permitted for training, Grime decides to train the EVR dog ‘live’ blood, or blood not afflicted by decomp components and then allows for the world to call Eddie a cadaver dog.
And says nothing about Eddie being also a blood dog on Netflix this year.
Apparently, Grime uses the same ‘live’ blood that he uses to train Keela. This means that at the end of the training he has 2 dogs with one exact same skillset.
He has Keela to detect blood, so has no reason to train Eddie with ‘live’ blood but does it anyway. Just for fun. Or maybe it’s for those days when Keela calls in sick and doesn’t come into the office, Eddie can do her job.
To add to the confusion – Grime must be really a prankster – he trains Eddie to give the exact same alert to 2 different scents: blood and cadaver. Why make things easy and train the dog to give different alerts to different substances? Nah, that would be too easy and too straightforward!
And then, he is careful to explain from where he gets the blood to train Keela but forgets to say that he uses it for Eddie as well.
Grime is also very careful to inform the possibility that there could have been a concentration of scent in the parents’ bedroom but not ONCE does he raise the possibility that any of the double alerts (location alerted by both Eddie & Keela) could just be blood. Not on video nor on his written report.
Only in a rogatory, of which we have an only translated version, does he say something to which our critics hold on to dear life. Only that sentence matters. Only that sentence is law (not even the one preceding it in the same translation should be taken into account) and nothing else or reality matters.
By the way, have you people figured by now the conundrum you’ve dug yourselves into?
A clue: we haven’t mentioned it yet.
Could you tell me how old Eddie was in 2007 and how old Keela was?
ReplyDeleteCould you also tell me how Eddie would alert to a concealed murder weapon such as a knife used to stab someone?
According to you, Eddie only alerts to blood from a dead person. In the files it can be seem quite clearly that Eddie alerted to a car key that had Gerry McCann's dried blood on it. Could you tell me when Gerry was brought back from the dead please?
You won't have the guts to publish this because you cannot answer without A. Lying about the facts, or B. Proving yourself to be wrong AND having lied about the facts.
Anonymous 4 Nov 2019, 22:40:00,
DeleteGuts? What has guts to do with publishing a pathetic WUI comment (WUI – Written Under the Influence)?
At most, one could eventually feel commiseration for you, one could feel sorry for you and hesitate on whether to publish your cringeworthy comment because it does really embarrass you and the rest gang beyond what you usually embarrass yourself and them. That is saying quite lot.
Since one does not feel sorry for walking Belascos, not for a second did we hesitate in publishing your comment.
Let’s then deal with the questions in your comments.
What has the age of the dogs have to do with anything? Seriously?
Are you implying that Martin Grime brought in underaged dogs to Luz? Really? Whatever substance you introduce in your body is really starting to affect and afflict (our new favourite word) you.
But for your information, Eddie was 7 and Keela 3, according to Grime in his report. Keela was actually 8 weeks old in June 2004, according to South Yorkshire Police.
A perfectly irrelevant piece of information but there you have it. Will be curious on what you are going to make of it. I have a fiver against the team that you are going to do nothing.
About the idiotic knife. What concealed weapon, what concealed knife are you talking about? What has a knife to do with the case? Don’t you have any sense of self-awareness that you can’t see how ridiculous you sound?
If you are implying that a cadaver dog is trained to detect ALL concealed knives in crimes, you haven’t the faintest idea of what you are talking about.
Unless a stabbing crime was being staged, meaning a body is stabbed 2 or 3 hours post-mortem to throw the police off the real cause of death, the blood on the knife would not be contaminated contaminated by cadaver odour.
As the most likely scenario is that the knife removed immediately from the body at the time of stabbing, then the blood would not be contaminated.
The cadaver dogs are trained to find cadavers or traces of cadaver. Where the cadavers were or where they are concealed.
This is done by alerting to surfaces objects/surfaces the cadavers came in contact with after being moved around as… cadavers.
If a person is killed in a living-room, sheds blood there, and then is immediately or very soon taken from there to the bedroom then the EVR dog will not alert in the living-room. The body has not had the time to develop the decomp components (another favourite expression of ours) so nothing there is contaminated, so nothing there for the EVR dog to alert.
The person was killed there but no vestiges for the dog to alert to, so he doesn’t.
In the Maddie case, we only know she was in the living-room because she laid there for enough time for the decomp components (the scent of which is what Eddie alerts to) to contaminate, or afflict the floor surface and/or blood that the body came in contact with after that period of time.
If they had removed the body shortly after death, we would have never known that she had ever been there. And Keela would not alert either. Nothing to do with her capabilities but with the fact that Eddie would not have alerted.
If there was no reason to find that corner of the living-room suspicious, Keela would not have been taken to that location. Keela is taken to where Eddie alerts and as Eddie would not have alerted, no reason to take Keela there.
To answer directly your question: if the knife served to kill the victim, meaning no decomp components present on the blade, then Eddie would not alert to that knife.
Keela would if shown the knife as it contained human blood, Eddie wouldn’t because it didn’t contain decomp components.
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteBut the usefulness of this knife comment is that it shows very clear who wrote this pathetic WUI comment.
It follows the comment we censored at 3 Nov 2019, 18:43:00, where the same reader asked a question about the knife:
“So blood on a knife...would you class that as
"dead person blood" or "blood from a living person"?”
We censored so much of that comment that we were asked by quite a few people in what way what we had censored was related to the knife question.
We take the opportunity to explain to all our readers that what we censored is in nothing related to the knife question or to the case, otherwise we would have left those bits for the readers to read.
What was censored was the usual personal abuse Mr Thompson likes to submit and has been doing consistently these days.
The question to retain here this is the perfect example of how it shows how much Mr Thompson likes to hear the sound of his own voice.
He submits an idiotic question in the hope that by using a stabbing he demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt why Eddie would be trained for ‘live’ blood.
The question is indeed pathetic because if ‘live’ blood is what is in question, then that’s what Keela is trained for. With the knife he demonstrates absolutely nothing because we would still have a duplication of canine resources and the point is that those defending Eddie is a blood dog cannot explain the reason for this duplication.
We won’t even go into debating whether the victim ends up dying, because if there’s no death there’s no cadaver but it shows that because he thinks it’s a brilliant example, he assumes the rest of the world sees it like he does, that it is indeed brilliant, and so feels compelled to persist in that assumed brilliance to mesmerise the world.
We’ve called it previously the “Clover Effect”, whereby Mr Thompson holds a clover and thinks he’s holding the Amazon and will proceed to debate as if that is FACT before the puzzled look in everybody’s face – with the exception of the gang who will clap gleefully like seals begging for sardines in some zoo marine show, reinforcing his delusion.
He thinks he’s brilliant, that gang tells him he’s brilliant so the rest of the world MUST think he’s brilliant. As the world doesn’t, he gets angry and writes WUI comments like this one.
And this rage blinds him. He even forgets he has recently asked questions and so asks them again.
To save time, we’ll just copy and paste the question and the subsequent conversation:
In our post “Blood and the EVR dog – Part 6”
https://textusa.blogspot.com/2019/09/blood-and-evr-dog-part-6.html
Anonymous1 Oct 2019, 21:45:00
Was Gerry dead when he bled onto the car key that Eddie alerted to?
*****
Textusa1 Oct 2019, 21:55:00
Anonymous 1 Oct 2019, 21:45:00,
No.
First, you have to believe in what the FSS has said when it said that it was Gerry's blood.
If it was indeed Gerry's blood, then Eddie did not alert to that. Eddie alerted to what he was trained for, cadaver scent.
*****
Anonymous7 Oct 2019, 02:15:00
So just to be absolutely clear, you are accusing the FSS, and in particular the person whose name is attached to the report that states the cellular material on the key fob belonged to Gerry McCann, of lying to help cover up the death of Madeleine McCann?
Don'tbe a coward now, Mario. Let's see you at and by what you believe (or don't, as the case may be)
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteTextusa9 Oct 2019, 10:40:00
Anonymous 7 Oct 2019, 02:15:00,
About the FSS and it saying to whom the biological samples from this case belonged to:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/08/super-kid.html
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/10/remarkable-marksmanship.html
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/11/dna-bar-code_1.html
You’re welcome.
About being a coward, when are expecting to return to Twitter? (as if you have really abandoned it, just scared to tweet under your own name…)
It’s now becoming boring watching Jules announcing duds. First it was the BRT pics that were going to get the blog owned. Nada. Niente. Zilch.
Now it was her announcing that you were going to making a bombastic come-back on Twitter, as if you were the second coming of Christ there. Up to today nada. Niente. Zilch.
One thing that must be said about you is that you are consistent in making your friends look really bad.
*****
He goes and asks the same thing again, Pathetic.
As both dogs reacted to the key fob, then it could be the same as their alerts in the living room and car, Keela was alerting to blood from Gerry and Eddie to cadaver odour deposited after handling a cadaver.
In the apartment, the blood detected by Keela could have been from a living or a dead Maddie but Eddie alerted to cadaver odour in the same area.
And about it being Gerry’s, we recommend that Mr Thompson scrolls to key card and Gerry (page 2653)
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm
A low-level incomplete DNA profile which matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Gerry McCann.
The sample wasn’t sent for further testing using LCN DNA profiling tests. It doesn’t say how many matching components.
But as Mr Thompson has said in his head that it belongs to Gerry, then it belongs to Gerry and whoever dares contradict him will see the wrath of his fury, a tactic that has worked for years but unfortunately for Mr Thompson, the time for such tactics has passed.
By the way, you seem to have more faith in the FSS than McFadden and her supporters.
DeleteTell us again about the two different types of blood. Never laughed so much in ages lol
ReplyDeleteMr Thompson,
DeleteWhich explanation would you prefer? From JBLittlemore or from the Frog?
Tell you what, will give you both. From JBLIttlemore:
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1188799737241264128
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
Replying to @FragrantFrog
EVRD same - dried blood from live humans. Use of cadaver components in UK not permitted. Blood also remains sterile for many hours within corpse - not 'afflicted' by decomp components in that time. So assuming Textusa still arguing the point?
5:48 AM - 28 Oct 2019
Means there is blood not 'afflicted' by decomp components and blood that is 'afflicted' by decomp components.
We call the blood not 'afflicted' by decomp components as live blood and the blood that is 'afflicted' by decomp components as dead blood.
Now by the Frog:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1143979265286914049
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2
I know that. You know that. But as neither dog can be trained on blood from a human cadaver in the UK, what's the point of Keela? The CSI dog has to be trained to ignore any odour from surfaces, textiles etc....so would Keela alert to cadaver contaminated blood?
9:28 PM - 26 Jun 2019
Means there is blood that is not cadaver contaminated and blood that is cadaver contaminated.
We call the blood that is not cadaver contaminated as live blood and the blood that is cadaver contaminated as dead blood.
Not sure if JBLittlemore and the Frog will enjoy you laughing at them but that’s between you and them.
After realising Jim Gamble made an empty threat, Ponce goes political and mentions the RUC, and tops it off with one of her signature sexual references by calling him 'nipples'. Having been alerted to this car crash, Ben Thompson's other impersonator @turaffetamer pops up to fan the flames with one of his pot and kettle comments about stalking women. How much longer Jim Gamble will carry on making empty threats about suing people is anyone's guess, but this may not end up in as big a public display as the gang thinks it will. If he proceeds with a good lawyer, the gang and those supporting them could find themselves gagged from discussing the matter online until it concludes, and possibly end up in a similar position to Karen Lowe Saunders and Karen Ormiston where they are not allowed to mention the matter in public ever again. It is noted none of Ponce's Irish journalist contacts are rushing to her aid to 'plaster' social media with her non story yet. If she wants to use journalists, she should set them in motion before any gagging order is put in place. Contempt of court can be painful. In support of his case, Jim Gamble would also be within his rights to produce years of evidence pertaining to Ponce's own threatening behaviour and malicious communications towards women and men. Her contributions to twitter, laidbare and Pillory blogs being prime examples of her sick mind.
ReplyDeleteTweets re the post above.
ReplyDeleteBCS Northern Ireland
@BCS_NI
·
Mar 7
1 week to go until our event with
@JimGamble_INEQE
on "Why #safeguarding should be a pillar in the #IT profession". A must-attend event for IT professionals in N.I. Register NOW: https://eventbrite.co.uk/e/northern-ireland-ethics-in-it-why-safeguarding-should-be-a-pillar-in-our-profession-registration-53006233070?aff=erelexpmlt
@belfasthourNI
@QCSQUB
@CAS_NI
@SyncNIevent
@BigDataBelfast
@Womenintech_bfs
Emma Wilson
@EmmaJJW
·
Mar 8
Will Mr /gamble be talking about how he cheered on the doxing and harassment of a pensioner at the behest of Gerald McCann until she took her life? #McCann #McCanns
Madeleine CaseTweets��
@McCannCaseTweet
·
Mar 8
Jim Gamble frightens me. Something very intimidating about him. How was he ever in charge of protecting children?
Nobody RESIGNS from a well paid job.
Theresa May called his management style of CEOP a “Quango” #mccann
Sharon 'Shazzzaa' Taylor
@shazbat2008
·
Nov 3
Your not telling me he really thinks the #mccanns are innocent ? Another slime Ball protecting those hideous parents, child protection my arse, I wonder if they paid him off with the Madeleine fund/PLC , paid for lots of things other than looking for their child....
Jim Gamble
@JimGamble_INEQE
·
Nov 3
I don’t know who you think you are but I suggest you contact a good lawyer ASAP. As I’ll be contacting mine to serve papers on you for defamation. You simply can’t say things that are not true without consequences.
Sharon 'Shazzzaa' Taylor
@shazbat2008
·
21h
Where in my opinion of you have i broken the law? You serve papers on me and let's go to court shall we? That will please your friends the Mccanns ... You don't scare me , I don't hide behind a fake profile , bring it on son....
Jim Gamble
@JimGamble_INEQE
·
20h
Good. Pls DM me your details & I’ll have papa Wes served. I also suggest you take professional legal advice as well. You need a lawyer to read your tweet.
andy
@andyLUHGNW3427
·
17h
Take ya bullshit threats elsewhere.
The Ponce of Dubai
@The_Truth_II
Replying to
@andyLUHGNW3427
@JimGamble_INEQE
and 9 others
Is ‘ nipples’threatening those he thinks are women again?
9:42 PM · Nov 4, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
2
Likes
Sean McCaughey
@seanmccaugh
·
2h
You voted to drop bombs on children in the middle-east. Jim was involved in RUC Special Branch that colluded with loyalists. Neither of you are in a position to lecture.
The Ponce of Dubai
@The_Truth_II
·
1h
You accuse Jim of some serious stuff yet he doesn’t threaten to sue you for libel odd as he only threatens women stalking & threatening them with legal action this is not libel Jim it’s clear on your timeline #bully #threats #digitalfootprint #mccann #rRUC
Karen Lowe Sanders
@EricaCantona7
·
1h
Yes I agree. Not a word of litigation to male tweeters, why is that ?
The Ponce of Dubai
@The_Truth_II
Replying to
@EricaCantona7
@seanmccaugh
and 4 others
No threats against those who accuse him of colluding with heinous acts?
9:16 AM · Nov 5, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
1
Retweet
2
Likes
Karen Lowe Sanders
@EricaCantona7
·
1h
Replying to
@The_Truth_II
@seanmccaugh
and 4 others
Odd, don't you think ?
Roger Wabbit
@turaffetamer
·
1h
Replying to
@The_Truth_II
@EricaCantona7
and 5 others
Only ever threatens people who doubt the mccanns who say the obvious. And usually women
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1191512320385654785
ReplyDeleteJ B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
In the United States, dog handlers can legally obtain bodily components like human placenta & blood, but not always easily, & trainers like Cablk often resort to using their own blood. Re Mary Cablk, scientist at the Desert Research Institute, Nevada #herdriedblood #alive #Mccann
12:27 AM - 5 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1191514638816628738
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
J B Littlemore Retweeted J B Littlemore
The article referenced concerning scientist using her own blood if necessary, to train cadaver dogs - https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/21/magazine/how-to-train-a-cadaver-dog.html
#driedbloodfromlivinghuman #Mccann
J B Littlemore added,
https://twitter.com/JBLittlemore/status/1191512320385654785
12:36 AM - 5 Nov 2019
*****
Bringing article over:
“How to Train a Cadaver Dog
By Malia Wollan
June 19, 2015
“Drug dogs are trained on drugs, and cadaver dogs are trained on cadaver,” says Mary E. Cablk, a scientist at the Desert Research Institute in Nevada who studies scent detection. Training a cadaver dog requires regular contact with human blood, decaying flesh and bones. In the United States, dog handlers can legally obtain bodily components like human placenta and blood, but not always easily, and trainers like Cablk often resort to using their own blood. Some substitute commercially available ersatz odors (the most common is Sigma Pseudo Corpse Scent, which comes in three kinds: recently dead, decomposed and drowned). But deceased humans produce unique volatile organic compounds, and canines have a keenly attuned sense of smell, so you should practice on the real thing. “You don’t want to put other people at risk,” Cablk says — searches are often in dangerous areas, like collapsed buildings — “to find what is ultimately a dead pet.”
Cablk works about 30 cases a year with sheriffs’ departments in California and Nevada, accompanied by her two cadaver dogs. You don’t want a really smart animal, she says; its curiosity might lead to distraction. Instead, look for a midsize dog that never tires of playing with a tennis ball or pull toy. Eventually, you will teach the dog to associate the smell of death with its toy by making the toy smell like death. Your dog should be exposed to, and trained to find, all sorts of dead bodies — on varied terrain, day or night, rain or shine. “You have the whole gamut, from old dry bones to somebody who dropped dead from a stroke an hour before you showed up,” Cablk says. Until proved otherwise, every area is a crime scene. Coach your dog to calmly sit or lie down when it locates a scent’s source. Digging, peeing and frolicking can destroy evidence.
Because most cadaver dogs are deployed by volunteer handlers, establish relationships with local law-enforcement officers if you hope to get your dog out on a real case. Cablk says cadaver-dog handlers should also be physically fit, able to pass background checks, skilled with maps and GPS, unafraid of the dark and unperturbed by whatever flavor of death a dog might uncover.”
*****
““Drug dogs are trained on drugs, and cadaver dogs are trained on cadaver,” says Mary E. Cablk…”
Is she a non-fiction true Walking Dead?
“Your dog should be exposed to, and trained to find, all sorts of dead bodies — on varied terrain, day or night, rain or shine. “You have the whole gamut, from old dry bones to somebody who dropped dead from a stroke an hour before you showed up,””
Nothing about the cadaver dogs finding live blood…
Calling everyone "Mr Thompson" is a pathetic tactic. I am not Mr Thompson, and quite frankly the number of times you've been proven wrong on this should be enough to embarrass you.
DeleteNow let me address your points. Points that you should have been able to pick up on, as they related directly to things YOU have published here.
Firstly, look above at the document you posted from JB Littlemore (and failed to read). It clearly states Buster is a cadaver dog. It also clearly states, in the very same document that Frankie was a cadaver AND blood dog. Why the need to use two different descriptions if ALL cadaver dogs alert to (what you've so ridiculously labelled) dead blood?
You then seem perplexed as to how Frankie could alert to blood and cadaver. That's because you refuse to admit it's a possibility. In short, you're unbelievably thick.
When a drug dog is deployed, do you think heroin gives off the same scent as crystal meth, or crack etc etc? No, they're trained to alert to illegal drugs. They'd no doubt have a field day at your hovel.
The knife question is in response to the second paper, the one that says how blood dogs are used to find murder weapons. Eddie was a blood dog who also alerted to cadaver, same as Frankie. Both would have been able to find a murder weapon, a knife for example, and the knife would not have needed to have been sticking in a corpse for two hours before being removed and concealed.
Are you getting there yet? Of course you're not, you're full of hot air and devoid of any form of intelligence.
Finally, you ask why I asked if you knew how old Eddie was in 2007 and how old Keela was. My reason for asking was because it was blatantly obvious that prior to my question you had no idea.
Your words:
"He has Keela to detect blood, so has no reason to train Eddie with ‘live’ blood but does it anyway."
Eddie was trained long before Keela was even born! So your comment makes no sense whatsoever.
Regardless of all of this, Martin Grime clearly states Eddie alerted to dried blood from a living person. No matter how you try to dress it up, you cannot alter facts...hard as you might try.
Oh, hello Silver,
DeleteYou mean that comment wasn’t Written Under the Influence? Really? Written completely sober?
If we hadn’t read your reply, we wouldn’t have believe that it was so. But now, having read your reply, we do believe as it speaks for itself.
So readers know, this is the comment we censored that we thought was from Mr Thompson but now know is from Silver:
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
So blood on a knife...would you class that as
"dead person blood" or "blood from a living person"?
When will you admit you're wrong about the dogs and as such get down on bended knee and apologise to all those you've falsely accused of being in gangs and paid off by Michael Wright?
Given the things you've incorrectly said, I would suggest a full blog dedicated to all those you have...shall we say, "been mistaken" about", apologising for your obsessive behaviour, the stalking of their children, families, careers, private lives etc, and to those you befriended and told untruths to...some of whom are no longer with us.
How about that, Mario?
You don't have it in you, do you.
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 3 Nov 2019, 02:50:00”
*****
Let me tell you that to all the people we have shown this comment (those who we have mentioned who asked about the censoring) were unanimous in thinking that it was Mr Thompson. By your confession it isn’t and that only means that you have graduated with flying colours from Mr Thompson’s school of abuse.
The drug dog analogy doesn’t work.
DeleteThe dog is trained to alert to a variety of drugs and whatever it detects, no time is wasted finding substances which are possessed legally.
A cadaver dog trained to alert to blood which could have been from a living person could spend a lot of wasted time alerting to blood which was unrelated to any crime.
The question is- why didn’t Eddie alert in any other apartment, including Murat’s? Did nobody bleed anywhere other than the McCanns apartment and car?
And why would Grime not advise the PJ, who were unfamiliar with the use of these dogs, of the relevance of Eddie’s alerts when blood was also alerted to by Keela?
Comment received that we have censored. Apparently our critics are unable to express an opinion without being abusive:
Delete"Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
He did. He clearly said that the dogs findings needed to be corroborated by forensics. (Censored).
Drug dogs are the same, (censored). Their alerts also need backing up after drugs are tested.
(Censored)
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 6 Nov 2019, 07:38:00"
Unpublished comments:
Delete- Anonymous to Textusa at 5 Nov 2019, 21:23:00
- Anonymous to Textusa at 5 Nov 2019, 20:44:00
- Anonymous to Textusa at 5 Nov 2019, 21:23:00
- Anonymous to Textusa at 5 Nov 2019, 21:40:00
- Anonymous to Textusa at 6 Nov 2019, 07:31:00
You people are really obsessed with a blog you claim none of you read! And that was just on the authorship of comments!
We’re awfully sorry we have apparently misidentified the authors of the comments but the logic employed pointed in those directions.
But is it really important we may have got that wrong?
We don’t think so. Let us give you an example, as to why we don’t think it’s really important:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187396453918035968
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2 @xxSiLverdoexx
What I read last night seemed to insinuate you were the person Tex met in Lisbon.....but it was late so perhaps a misunderstanding?
4:52 PM - 24 Oct 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1187397099580788738
00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx
Replying to @FragrantFrog @MrDelorean2 @xxSiLverdoexx
I can guarantee you I was most definitely not the person who met Tex in Lisbon.. I'd rather eat my own head..๐
4:55 PM - 24 Oct 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187398404076376064
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2 @xxSiLverdoexx
Is that a pumpkin I see on your shoulders? ๐
5:00 PM - 24 Oct 2019
*****
Is it more important that to know that the Frog may have gotten it wrong or that the Frog thinks Jules is someone who is capable of doing the treacherous double-crossing the person who came to Lisbon did?
https://twitter.com/xxSiLverdoexx/status/1191450212121886721
ReplyDeleteSheLLxx ©Shellyphant ๐ญ ๐ฆ ๐E ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ㊙ ๐ช ❓ ๐ค @xxSiLverdoexx
FollowFollow @xxSiLverdoexx
More
Dogs ARE reliable >>>
https://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/13/us/missing-men-bucks-county-cadaver-dogs/index.html
No wonder the camp fear them so much...
#Thenoseknows
#dogsdontlie #cadaverx11 #mccann
#MadeleineMcCann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIjhpnjW4AEW0Yb?format=jpg&name=small
8:20 PM - 4 Nov 2019
[The picture is a diagram of apartment 5A where it’s signalled locations for cadaver odour and blood.
Parents’ bedroom – cadaver odour
Living-room – cadaver odour and blood
Parent’s bedroom window (?) – cadaver odour
Backyard – cadaver odour]
*****
Why is Silver betraying her gang?
Who says it’s cadaver odour? It’s now said to be blood! As detected by Eddie, the blood dog!
Fighting talk from Ben Thompson telling Jim Gamble he will explain matters in in court will help Ponce. Not. All Ponce has left to do now, is call Jim Gamble a 'spaz', 'paedo' or a 'mong', and he will have had the full extent of her repertoire.
ReplyDeleteRoger Wabbit
@turaffetamer
·
6h
Only ever threatens people who doubt the mccanns who say the obvious. And usually women
The Ponce of Dubai
@The_Truth_II
·
5h
I wonder why his interest never stems to children like #charleneDownes she would surely be everything he is involved in #grooming #abuse #safeguarding but not a peep #mccann only. #theresGoldinthemthereHills
Roger Wabbit
@turaffetamer
·
3h
Would the Charlene Downes case gain as much public interest and make as much money?
Answer is in the question
The Ponce of Dubai
@The_Truth_II
·
2h
Watch out Mr Wabbit he will be tracing your digital footprint for having an opinion
Roger Wabbit
@turaffetamer
Replying to
@The_Truth_II
@EricaCantona7
and 5 others
Look forward to it to he honest. I'll see him in court and explain the difference between opinion and libel
1:51 PM · Nov 5, 2019·Twitter for Android
3
Likes
Seems Jim Gamble is the least of Ponce's problems. This may explain why the gang has been trying to silence the people who know what they have been up to, and why they are acting likes lemmings. Erica Jane's suspension has also had input from the gang.
DeleteWith regard to the post @ Anonymous6 Nov 2019, 14:10:00
ReplyDeleteWithout exception, nobody on the McCann case has ever used such language apart from Ben Thompson and @TeddyShepherd.
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191340766238560258
ReplyDeleteMs Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
For Text USA and others, from Martin Grime's white paper, 2018. VRD dogs alert to 'generic' human blood deposits. #mccann #McCann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIh98YlXYAULKx0.png
1:05 PM - 4 Nov 2019
[The picture attached says the following (our caps to highlight what CruftMs highlighted in yellow and blue:
“It is the mission of Forensic Canine operatives to locate and accurately respond to the presence of generic human decomposition odour and dried human blood. (Victim Recovery Dog) This will be conducted in any, and all, expected operational contexts, environments and climates likely to be encountered when deployed by the host agency. This will include: surface and sub-surface deposition on land or in water, trace evidence, human decomposition odour transference, and crime scene investigation for GENERIC HUMAN BLOOD DEPOSITS. The remote screening of items of property and clothing will be included to assist in forensic recovery and provision of case intelligence.
generic
/dสษชหnษrษชk/
adjective
1. characteristic of or RELATING TO A CLASS OR GROUP OF THINGS; NOT SPECIFIC.
"chรจvre is a generic term for all goat's milk cheese"
Similar: general – common – collective - non-specific – inclusive”]
*****
CruftMs,
First, we would like to note how went faster than a Lamborghini in a Top Gear show from “Texty! ๐ฅฐ๐” to “Text USA”.
The phrase “…and crime scene investigation for generic human blood deposits” means expected (generic) deposits of blood. Or the different ways blood may be found in a crime scene. Not deposits of whatever blood, as you are trying to imply.
If ‘generic’ referred to blood, that would mean there would be more than one kind of blood, and you say that is certainly not the case.
‘Dead’ blood v ‘live’ blood v ‘only one’ blood, according to our critics:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191102243484946432
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others
Oh dear. It is not 'live blood' Grime says 'blood from a live human being'. As soon as blood leaves the body it starts to decay. So there is no 'live blood' vs 'dead blood'....just blood. #mccann
9:17 PM - 3 Nov 2019
This tweet was liked by:
ะ ัััะบะฐั bot ะััะฝั ๐ท๐บ @AssuntaMaddonni
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx
Danielle Simone @DaniellSimone
Velma Dinkley @VelmaDi42614172
Dex @Dex________x
SheLLxx ©Shellyphant ๐ญ ๐ฆ ๐E ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ㊙ ๐ช ❓ ๐ค @xxSiLverdoexx
*****
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191307225064714241
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @FragrantFrog @BourgeoisViews and 4 others
You don't understand what I said. ALL blood has come from a live human being. The dogs do not know if the blood is from a live or consequently dead person...that's why Keela is used too. If she doesn't alert Eddie was alerting to death.
10:52 AM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Dex________x/status/1191140996563820544
Dex @Dex________x
Replying to @FragrantFrog @CruftMs and 5 others
What’s the difference between dried blood from a dead person and dried blood from a live person ? >
11:51 PM - 3 Nov 2019
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191307678292873217
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Dex________x @FragrantFrog and 5 others
There is none and the dogs can't tell us that. All blood has come out of a live human being and as soon as it's outside the body it starts to breakdown. That's why 2 dogs are used, if Eddie alerts only, he is alerting to death, not blood.
10:54 AM - 4 Nov 2019
This tweet was liked by:
00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx
Velma Dinkley @VelmaDi42614172
Dex @Dex________x
J B Littlemore @JBLittlemore
*****
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191308714076246016
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Esjabe1 @Dex________x and 5 others
Blood has always come from a 'live human'. They were alive when the heart was pumping the blood ๐
10:58 AM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191310846913323008
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Esjabe1 @BourgeoisViews and 4 others
Dried blood of a living person? There is only BLOOD. It all starts to dry and decompose as soon as it comes out of the body. Nothing Martin Grime did made his dogs 'less reliable'. Why did #mccann s not use that for defence if true? #McCann
11:06 AM - 4 Nov 2019
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191311545600528385
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others
Complete Balls. both Eddie and Keela were trained on human BLOOD, it ALL comes from people who were alive at the time and ALL blood starts to decompose as it has left the body.
11:09 AM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191372860260077570
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @EricaCantona7 @Jules1602xx and 7 others
I haven't read it all either but he seems to think there is a difference between 'live blood' and 'dead blood'....and that Eddie the cadaver dog was NOT trained on blood, which he was because MG has stated as much.
3:13 PM - 4 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191661928487231490
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others
My source is basic science BLOOD is BLOOD, It ALL starts to decompose once it leaves the body. Grime has said his dogs are trained to alert to 'GENERIC' human blood. That is ALL BLOOD!..contd
10:21 AM - 5 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191665888631644161Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others
You are wrong and don't understand how they are trained. ALL blood is alerted to, how would Keela pick up the scent of VICTIMS blood in a murder if it was 'live' blood? #mccann #McCann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EImltelXYAAluv2.png
10:37 AM - 5 Nov 2019
[Picture attached says following (our caps to highlight what CruftMs has highlighted):
“Following a HOMICIDE with a number of possible suspects, items of clothing from all suspects were screened with HBDD. A NUMBER OF ITEMS RECOVERED that were blood stained. SOME WERE CLASSIFIED AS VICTIM’S BLOOD others were from other persons not involved.
๐ ััื ฮฑะฒั ๐ @Esjabe1
So crucify me because I took a shortcut.
And you’re wrong. There is a tremendous difference. THERE IS ๐ข FROM A LIVE HUMAN BEING THAT KEELA (& EDDIE WAS INITIALLY) TRAINED ON & THERE IS CADAVER ๐ข THAT EDDIE WAS TRAINED TO DETECT AND KEELA WASN’T.
1/2"]
This tweet was liked by:
Karen Lowe Sanders @EricaCantona7
Rosemary @MoonPerrl
Phil Tann @PhilipTann1961
*****
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191692736329650177
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Esjabe1 @DaniellSimone and 3 others
AT LAST has the penny dropped?! Yes blood from a homicide victim was spilled when the person was alive. ALL BLOOD has come from a live person when it's spilled or extracted. There is no 'alive' vs. 'dead' blood! #mccann #McCann
12:24 PM - 5 Nov 2019
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteThere’s no question about that CruftMs thinks that the distinction between dead and live blood is absurd.
But what is relevant to us is that JBLittlemore, via liking some of the tweets above agrees. In fact when we asked him the questions about how would Eddie and Keela react to blood from different kinds of situations, we expected that according to the set of beliefs he has expressed that he would give a very simple and straightforward answer: both dogs will alert to all the bloods you mentioned because both dogs are trained to alert to blood.
But he didn’t. Instead he kept on feeding us information to befuddle. But now he not only has pinned his colours to that mast as he has taken it one step further as he has endorsed the opinion that there is no such thing as differentiation between ‘live’ and ‘dead’ blood.
And guess who is also of the same opinion? Turaffetamer. At the time he even entitled himself as Turfaffetamer and the Dead Blood:
https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1151769629007712256
Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer
Replying to @turaffetamer @Esjabe1 and 45 others
But thanks for confirming the dogs were correct when they alerted blood, as they are trained to do,Eddie dried blood, because effectively dried blood is dead blood, the blood cell dies once it leaves the human body
9:24 AM - 18 Jul 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1152265136280932353
Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer
Replying to @Jules1602xx @Esjabe1 and 45 others
That's the evrd dog eddie jules, csi blood dogs are trained to alert to the odour of blood only, so fresh, dried, watered down, will still alert. Eddie will alert to dried blood from a live human because dried blood is dead blood bad releases cadaver odour
6:13 PM - 19 Jul 2019
******
https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1154353027735805953
Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer
Replying to @Ntown1976Nick @nessiestressy and 27 others
I sniff what I'm trained to sniff, human cadavar including from dried / dead blood woof woof
12:29 PM - 25 Jul 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1155031068849950720
Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer
Replying to @Ntown1976Nick @Esjabe1 and 29 others
That doesn't change the ducking fact that keela would have alerted to fresh blood or dried dead blood. Why try to deflect that fact, it's pointless. Csi dogs can be deployed within minutes to an assault, what good is a dog if it didn't alert to fresh blood?
9:24 AM - 27 Jul 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1175160176283926528
Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer
Replying to @Babs108164110 @Lambykins60
Nope not a prayer. The dogs alert to what they are trained to alert to. One blood the other cadavar and dried blood (dead blood) No other case have the dogs ever been slandered this much and Mr grime still works fbi. This prat is a tnuc
10:29 PM - 20 Sep 2019
Oh, and about the suggestion that blood is ONLY shed by living human beings:
DeleteCARE OF THE DECEASED PATIENT WITHIN INFECTION CONTROLICPR011
https://www.nhft.nhs.uk/download.cfm?doc=docm93jijm4n1413.pdf&ver=23960
Page 5 (our caps):
“Additional requirements for service users with infectious disease (particularly blood-borne infection)
•Adhering to standard infection prevention and control precautions, perform hygienic preparations (last offices) unless contraindicated in Appendix 2. Disposable apron and gloves should be worn throughout the procedure, eye and face protection should also be worn if there is a risk of splashing.
•Hygienic preparation of bodies involves washing the face and hands, closing the eyes and mouth, tidying the hair and possibly shaving the face. GROSS LEAKAGE OF BLOOD AND BODY FLUIDS FROM THE BODY ORIFICES SHOULD BE PREVENTED BY PACKING WITH COTTON WOOL.
•ALL WOUNDS SHOULD ALSO BE COVERED.”
one has commented on something an anonymous has mentioned above:
Delete“Anonymous 4 Nov 2019, 11:22:00
Nobody has commented on the experiment with the blood from accident victims.
If blood odour was the same from living or dead, what was the point of this experiment?”
*****
This is the article where the experiment is mentioned:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30176172/
“Blood was collected from four young people who died from traffic accidents and analyzed using HS-SPME/GC-MS at different decompositional stages.”
Why was this experiment necessary if all decomposed blood is the same?
Why not use blood from a haematology department and just give it time and allow it to decompose?
It seems the scientists who did the experiment with accident victims cadaver blood were simply wasting their time as they were obvious unaware that they could have used blood from a haematology department.
Maybe their article should be challenged by our critics giving their opinions on Twitter?
Best remind readers of all of the abstract:
DeleteThe admissibility of human "odor mortis" discrimination in courts depends on the lack of comprehension of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) during the human decay process and of the lack in standardized procedures in training cadaver dogs. Blood was collected from four young people who died from traffic accidents and analyzed using HS-SPME/GC-MS at different decompositional stages. Two dogs, professionally trained, were tested to exactly locate blood samples, for each time point of the experiment. We found a long list of VOCs which varied from fresh to decomposed blood samples, showing differences in specific compounds. Dog performance showed a positive predictive value between 98.96% and 100% for DOG A, and between 99.47% and 100% for DOG B. Our findings demonstrated that decomposing human blood is a good source of VOCs and a good target for canine training.
To those who are insisting that blood decomposes outside the bode once shed by a human being, implying that we have denied that, we recommend that they read our first post of the Blood and the EVR dog posts:
Deletehttps://textusa.blogspot.com/2019/05/blood-and-evrd-dog-part-1.html
We were very clear to explain what we consider to be the decomposition of blood outside the body.
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-X7hitQfC8h8/XO2hAVsawcI/AAAAAAAARu8/D-PATdj5Me8tLQQrjDCmYFBHEP9IzTdaQCLcBGAs/s400/blood%2Bpalette.jpg
And we showed how it blood decomposition differs from the very complex process that is the human decomposition.
It’s best to be grammatically correct when insulting people, otherwise one appears to be an ignoramus. It's whose, not who's.
ReplyDeleteGrime says “no trained dog will recognise the smell of fresh blood... they find and give the alert for dried blood from a live human being.”!
ReplyDeleteWhen he says “they”, I take it as him meaning blood detection dogs, not they as in Keela AND Eddie.
But it’s left open to interpretation because of the wording.
Keela was the only (experimental) blood dog in UK at the time Grime wrote that. There was no ambiguity - Grime meant VRDs as well as Keela.
DeleteFrog,
DeleteWithout wanting to interfere in whatever Anonymous will eventually reply, could you please provide a link to sustain that statement?
What do you make of the phrase "The dog will recognize all or parts of a human cadaver. he is not trained for 'live' human odours; no trained dog will recognize the smell of 'fresh blood'".
Thank you.
This link should cover my previous statement.
Deletehttps://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com/2009/11/south-yorkshire-police-killed-eddie-and.html
The VRD will alert to decomposition smells, which include dried/ decomposing blood outside the human body. It's quite straightforward.
Having read the article I concede that Keela was unique in her field at that time (2005) so unless any other dogs were trained in the same way by 2007, “ they” was likely to be a reference to both dogs.
DeleteThe article doesn’t mention anything about Keela being used as a means of eliminating Eddie’s alerts as a possible alert to blood ( referred to by others as working in tandem).
It only mentions Keela being able to locate minute samples of blood and give a silent alert.
I still think Eddie’s training (Frankie wasn’t handled by Grime) with cadavers in USA, making him an enhanced VRD, meant he didn’t respond to ‘live’ blood.
By live, I mean from people who were alive when the blood was obtained and that blood had decomposed subsequently. It would be dried, not flowing
Maybe Frog would kindly give her opinion as to why Eddie did not alert in any other location than McCann related?
He was taken to other apartments and to Mr Murat’s home. He was out on the streets. Did no other location have blood residues?
Anonymous 7 Nov 2019, 10:10:00,
DeleteIsn’t it interesting the Frog’s silence to your question, especially taking into account that she shares your concern?
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1179195256702681089
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Esjabe1 @Cerb32 and 2 others
That's the problem - no signals anywhere else & too many signals by one cadaver dog in random places to theorise a cohesive death & body occultation scenario.
PJ knew before dogs arrived VRD was trained on decomposing piglets.....
1:43 AM - 2 Oct 2019
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1188973974270689281
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @JBLittlemore
Whose point of fact do you start from, though...the McCanns, Team Amaral, Team Rebelo, or where?
You must be curious about why the dogs only alerted to McCann-related property & nowhere else. You must be curious about evidence which was ignored...surely?
12:21 AM - 29 Oct 2019
*****
Either the blood shed by the McCanns has a special scent, to which Eddie must have been specifically trained to alert for or no one else in Luz bled in 2007, only them.
The use of "finished off on your moms tits" identified the author straight away. There is a lot to say about his own sex life, but Textusa's great blog is not the place to say it.
ReplyDeleteWhy is Jules dissing the Rat??
ReplyDeleteThis is what Jules has said about the Rat, remember?
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1164444789170987013
00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx
Replying to @LoverandomIeigh @_Babalou_ and 12 others
The Rat was brilliant.. I loved the Rat.. ๐
But then so did Snips, in a more creepy way..
8:50 AM - 22 Aug 2019
But then in this exchange with CruftMs, Jules has this to say:
https://twitter.com/CruftMs/status/1191843332416266240
Ms Myrtle Willoughby Cruft @CruftMs
Replying to @Esjabe1 @FragrantFrog
You still don't understand do you. ALL blood, once outside the body starts to decompose. This is from a cadaver dog training manual...DECOMPOSED blood from INJURIES or FATALITIES, because the dog reacts to both. #mccann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EIpHAlJWkAATD8t.png
10:22 PM - 5 Nov 2019
[Picture attached says the following:
“on the car and scratches it. Check and make sure the vehicles used have not been involved in an accident with serious injuries or fatality, since residual (now decomposed) blood may interfere with training.”]
*****
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1192032765933473792
00The Jules... ๐ต️♀️ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx
Replying to @CruftMs @Esjabe1 @FragrantFrog
Doesn't 'dead blood' have an 'oily sheen'...
(Don't ask) ๐๐
10:55 AM - 6 Nov 2019
*****
Just asking because the Rat was very specific about an oily secretion:
https://twitter.com/IsmailARat5/status/1129331479786377216
Ismail A Rat @IsmailARat5
Replying to @IsmailARat5 @Cerb32 and 35 others
Let’s establish somehing, because I don’t like all the implications that I’m an “anti McCann” and stupid to boot...
The dog is a cadaver detection EVRD.
It doesn’t alert to nothing.
It alerts to presence of cadaver residue. Not something blown in the wind, but actual particles
11:23 AM - 17 May 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/IsmailARat5/status/1129332715029975042
Ismail A Rat @IsmailARat5
Replying to @IsmailARat5 @Cerb32 and 35 others
from oily secretion bonded to surfaces.
And I honestly don’t give a toss about who gets convicted for what.
But what I want to know is which Fokkers have been making or taking dead bodies with them on holiday on the Algarve and how is no one noticing?
Airport security don’t
11:27 AM - 17 May 2019
*****
Or, to be VERY CLEAR:
“The dog is a cadaver detection EVRD. It doesn’t alert to nothing. It alerts to presence of cadaver residue. Not something blown in the wind, but actual particles from oily secretion bonded to surfaces.”
And from the Rat, the BRILLIANT Rat:
Deletehttps://twitter.com/IsmailARat5/status/1128985099549192194
Ismail A Rat @IsmailARat5
Replying to @Cerb32 @maxine68711804 and 32 others
You have no support for your basis on ruling what the EVRD detected.
If “cadaver scent” qualifies as dried blood, deploying an EVRD AND a blood dog to the location would be utterly redundant.
If the dog can’t tell the difference between dried blood and cadaver, it literally
12:26 PM - 16 May 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/IsmailARat5/status/1128985365338034176
Ismail A Rat @IsmailARat5
Replying to @IsmailARat5 @Cerb32 and 33 others
has no purpose. And that is clearly not the position SYP, NSY, PJ, MG or ultimately the FBI took.
12:27 PM - 16 May 2019
And about the difference between blood decomposition and human decomposition, the Rat had this to say:
Delete“Blood is blood. Once out of the body it is a dead substance. It begins breaking down. But it presents an entirely different signature to cadaverine compounds in general, the “scent of death.”
It is that to which Eddie was trained to alert.”
https://textusa.blogspot.com/2019/07/blood-and-evrd-dog-part-4.html
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-h_MTIS2Ue2E/XRKFB4LuygI/AAAAAAAAR8I/RFzqRSuoyYsrzXKdw8lsNwCnK48bvN5agCLcBGAs/s320/Rat%2B099.jpg
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10294682/madeleine-mccanns-parents-hit-back-at-ex-cop-branded-search-waste/
ReplyDeleteI’ve seen some of John Coxon’s opinions, I think it was on twitter. He’s entitled to his opinion, which seems to be shared by the majority of people who comment as readers.
Cling and glimmer of hope suggest the paper thinks he’s correct. Just setting him up to take the flack for expressing an opinion they covertly agree with.
Well done John Coxon. Ben Thompson is tweeting furiously about this. To prove he is not at all jealous about John Coxon's contributions to the McCann case having been noticed by the popular press. Whilst the only thing he is ever noted for is his jealousy, parnoid delusions, foul language, and his obsession with sex organs and sex toys. eg "strap-on" "c*nt" "arsehole" etc. How can Michelle expect the public to take her tweets on the McCann case seriously, if she can't see "Andy" and Ben Thompson are the same person? Not a good detective.
Deletehttps://twitter.com/TrollBusterXXX/status/1192376865161437184
ReplyDeleteSteven Hamilton @TrollBusterXXX
Will someone tell Textusa to stop DMing me? If @JimGamble_INEQE wants contact details for Francis Dunn (Ponce) or Sharon Taylor (Shazza) he's quite capable of asking (as if he'd need to ๐). #mccann
9:42 AM - 7 Nov 2019
*****
Prefer my rabbit stew with carrots. Lot of carrots. You know, bring the sssstew to ssssizzling hot, let it sssssimmer for a bit and very sssssoooon carrots will be delicious. A treat for the forthcoming winter.
The other vegetables? Who cares? One never gives any importance to the minor ingredients of a recipe. You know, those that if one doesn’t put them in the pot no one misses them because they neither add or subtract any flavour.
But nice to see you trying to protect your friends.
Textusa @ 7 Nov 2019, 18:17:00
ReplyDelete"But nice to see you trying to protect your friends."
Why is @TrollbusterXX protecting the Ponce of Dubai by falsely accusing Francis Dunn of writing some of the most malicious communications ever posted on the McCann tag and facebook? A pro McCann would not only give her real name to Gamble, but would also advise him to review her posts written in similar vein on the NOT Textusa and laid bare blogs. Therefore the question has to be asked, is Ponce also part owner of the blogs where Ben Thompson, Jules and Zora McCartney regularly cause each other as much embarrassment as they cause for their innocent victims?
Well done to Textusa's team. Game set and match.
ReplyDeleteRemember this tweet from the Frog?
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187373061789667330
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2 @xxSiLverdoexx
Ah yes...that would be the blood dog which only alerted to dried blood from a living human because we all *know* that blood smells totally different to that from a cadaver..๐คช๐คก #mccann
3:19 PM - 24 Oct 2019
*****
Our caps:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/25264919/
Cadaver dogs: unscientific myth or reliable biological devices?
Riezzo I, et al. Forensic Sci Int. 2014.
Show full citation
Abstract
Dogs are commonly used to detect explosives, narcotics, and other illegal materials. In the forensic setting, CADAVER DOGS ARE TRAINED TO DETECT AND LOCATE CONCEALED HUMAN REMAINS OR FLUIDS due to the high sensitivity and selectivity of the canine olfactory system and the relative ease with which dogs can be trained and handled. The need for international and scientifically validated standards has long been outlined by the literature. It is important, therefore, to establish the reliability of the handler/dog team. Our study aimed to detect the real effectiveness of dogs trained to LOCATE HUMAN CADAVERIC BLOOD in very low concentrations, through an optimized and rigorously controlled design which would rule out any possible sources of bias. The study was designed to determine the dogs' OLFACTORY SENSITIVITY TO HUMAN CADAVERIC BLOOD and how this capacity might change as the dilution of blood increases from pure blood to very low concentrations. The further step was to examine the DOGS' ABILITY TO DISCRIMINATE AMONG TARGET (HUMAN CADAVERIC BLOOD) and non-target (confounding substances) odors (discriminative capability). Our results revealed that WELL TRAINED DOGS WERE ABLE TO DETECT HUMAN CADAVERIC BLOOD SAMPLES even when very low concentrations of blood were stored in the tubes, showing high levels of olfactory sensitivity and to discriminate the target odor even when the non-target odor was orders of magnitude higher in concentrations. Although our results are based only on two dogs, the procedure we used may provide a comprehensive answer to the need for a scientifically UNASSAILABLE TOOL FOR QUANTIFYING AND OBJECTIFYING THE PERFORMANCE OF WELL-TRAINED SPECIFIC SEARCH DOGS IN DETECTING HUMAN CADAVERIC BLOOD TRACES.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
PMID
25264919 [Indexed for MEDLINE]
Did the dogs alert to the scent of cadaver, the scent of blood from a cadaver or the scent of decomposed blood in the above experiment?
DeleteTo human cadaveric blood. It's quite straightforward.
DeleteAnd noted you have not replied as to why, if Eddie alerts to ALL blood as you say he does, he didn't alert to anything else or any other locations other than what was related to the McCanns.
DeleteIf a dog is trained to scent cadaver odour & dried "living human" blood, which of the elements is the dog alerting to in cadaver blood - one or both?
DeleteFrog,
DeleteDo not try to deflect. Why won’t you give an opinion on Eddie’s failure to alert in other locations?
We are also supposing that you’ve stopped laughing and dropped the asterisks in your “we all *know* that blood smells totally different to that from a cadaver..๐คช๐คก”
Your question assumes as FACT that an EVR dog is trained to alert to dried "living human" blood. No, it’s not a FACT.
We have already explained why we don’t think the translation of what Grime said is accurate.
This is what we have as an official statement in the PJ Files by Martin Grime:
“O cรฃo EVRD tambรฉm dรก o alerta a pistas sanguรญneas de um humano com vida ou somente de um cadรกver?
O cรฃo EVRD รฉ treinado utilizando material completo e desagregado, sangue, tecidos รณsseos, dentes, etc e contaminantes em decomposiรงรฃo. O cรฃo reconhecerรก ne integra ou ‘partes constituintes’ de um cadรกver humano. Ele nรฃo รฉ treinado para odores humanos ‘vivos’, nenhum cรฃo treinado reconheceria o cheiro de ‘sangue fresco’. Eles localizam porรฉm, e dรฃo alerta para sangue seco de um humano com vida.”
As far as we know Martin Grime did not say these words in Portuguese, so this is a translation, not his original words.
We have translated the translation into this:
“Does the EVRD dog also give alerts to blood leads from a human with life or just from a cadaver?
The EVRD dog is trained with complete and disaggregated material, blood, bone tissue, teeth, etc. and contaminants in decomposition. The dog will recognise in its entirety or ‘belonging parts’ of a human cadaver. He’s not trained for ‘live’ human odours, no trained dog would recognise the scent of ‘fresh blood’. They however locate, and give the alert to dried blood from a live human being.”
Grime has not signed those words. Unlike with other witnesses who spoke in English, had their words translated at the moment and then have them reread back by the translator, Grime submitted them in English and a translator translated them and that was appended in the files. So, Grime did not say those words but is said to have said them.
Only Martin Grime can clarify what he said or meant. And he can correct an incorrectness in the case there is an incorrectness. Robert Murat corrected his initial statements, the McCanns corrected parts of their initial statements just to name these. As far as we know, we don’t see you raise any problems with them having revised their initial statements.
This situation clearly requires that Martin Grime be recalled and clarify these translated words. Do not make them FACT, do not make them be direct speech from him.
Only Grime himself clarifying what he meant can resolve the argument. Until then, no one can claim them as fact.
You’ve justified the contradiction of the 2 last sentences with “The VRD will alert to decomposition smells, which include dried/ decomposing blood outside the human body. It's quite straightforward.”
Maybe you can give an opinion about something that baffles us. It seems that in terms of criminal interest and of the investigation in question Martin Grime decides to highlight a situation that NEVER happens. Really NEVER happens.
The only way that “He’s not trained for ‘live’ human odours, no trained dog would recognise the scent of ‘fresh blood” can be married with “They however locate, and give the alert to dried blood from a live human being” is for blood shed up to 1 to 2 hours at most post-mortem is not detected but after that it is.
Where, when or how is this of any interest? In what circumstances is a cadaver or blood dog deployed 1 to 2 hours post-mortem to a crime scene? So why mention a possibility that does not exist?
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteIt doesn’t make any sense, does it? Or are you saying that Grime is advising against the possibility of someone planting evidence in a crime scene? But even that is ridiculous because to have any meaning would be for the planter to be waiting for Grime and his dog to arrive, have a knife, cut himself (having to later explain why his DNA was present at the crime scene), drop blood on the crime scene and then hide behind the curtains and gleefully watch his planted fresh blood be… ignored by the EVR dog!
Do note that those words from Grime come in 2008, in a reply to rogatory questions. Meaning that if the PJ didn’t ask him that he would never mention it. Isn’t that a detail that should have been mentioned and highlighted right upfront without the need for anyone to ask him? Why did he hold back such crucial information?
And if he held it with ill-intent when he was in Luz (you have expressed the opinion that Grime cued his dogs so we think the idea of him holding back relevant information may have crossed your mind), then why “release” the info months later?
That’s why we say that until these words are clarified by Martin Grime himself, we will not accept them being taken as FACT because they are not fact.
Note, Martin Grime has had the opportunity to clarify them in the heavily pro-McCann Netflix documentary. He had then the opportunity to alert people that even though he was a cadaver dog, the alerts could have to blood. He doesn’t do that, does he?
Plus, the people who invested over 20 million in that documentary overlooked the obvious discreditation of Eddie and yet they overlooked to do it. They went on about the “possibility” of the DNA found in the Scenic belong to half of the UK but they forget to put in the one argument that would forever create doubt in the viewers minds – that Eddie was apparently also a blood dog. What incompetent money-wasting people. If only they had done their work…
Also, in the time Grime spent with the PJ in Luz, from the time he arrived to the time he submitted his written report, not ONCE does he even INSINUATE that any of Eddie’s alerts could be to blood. But then, months later and because he was asked, he mentions the subject by using as an example an absurd situation.
Note we have a dog handler who IN COURT (where it MATTERS) when asked if a cadaver dog alerted to “skin cells, scabs, or blood in homes” would make them useless, clearly STATES they were trained not to do that:
“Baumgart responded to criticisms of his work from defense witness, Andy Falco Jimenez. Jimenez, who has written books on dogs trained to find scents, said during testimony Thursday that a trained dog always will indicate on scents like skin cells, scabs or blood in homes. Baumgart said cadaver dogs are trained not to indicate on those things, because it would make them useless.”
A dog handler, IN COURT, addressing SPECIFICALLY the issue at hand is very clear. They do not alert to dry blood from a living human being.
That’s why we say a cadaver dogs alerts ONLY to what it is trained for: cadaver scent.
Cadaver scent contaminates objects and one of the objects it may contaminate is blood. A cadaver dog alerting to blood means that it’s alerting to the OBJECT blood which contaminated with cadaver scent. The alert is not to the blood scent.
That cadaver scent is the reason why in the experiment we mentioned the scientists used blood from people who had deceased from an accident was used.
Or as said: Anonymous4 Nov 2019, 11:22:00
“Nobody has commented on the experiment with the blood from accident victims.
If blood odour was the same from living or dead, what was the point of this experiment?”
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteDead blood is what the scientists have described as human cadaveric blood above. The object blood contaminated with cadaver scent.
That would explain why Eddie did not alert to any blood outside objects/locations related to the McCanns, even though we are certain that there were samples of blood shed by living human beings in other locations. Eddie did not miss these samples, he simply did not alert to what he was not trained to alert to.
It’s you, who say that Eddie alerts to dried blood from the living human being who has to give an opinion as to why Eddie didn’t alert in any other location/objects than McCann related. And we are waiting for it.
Or are you saying that stand-alone blood, blood shed by a living-human being, blood that has had no contacts with a cadaver, when it decomposes it will emit cadaver scent, the same as human cadaver?
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteFrom Operation Rectangle (Haut de la Garenne)....what was Eddie alerting to on this occasion?
Delete"V/T 9 Re-enforced concrete machine gun post and protective trench, personnel shelter attached. Earth and debris removed by hand and plant machinery to allow access.
The forensic strategy was implemented with the following results.
EVRD – positive indication.
SOCO visual – positive.
Blood dog - positive indication.
Visual – positive
UV – negative (items removed prior to screening).
Quasar - negative
Positive indications confirmed as being recently deposited tissues used to clean up after sex by unknown persons. Offences not suspected at this stage. Retained as exhibit should there be future reports of offences. There will be no forensic submission at this stage."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be decomposing blood - it's just part of a different mixture
If I bake a carrot cake, the carrot doesn't cease to be carrot after cooking it with other ingredients. A dog trained to alert to carrot will give a positive response, whatever the state of the carrot.
As far as Eddie's non-alerts to all things non-McCann...a)we haven't seen the video-recording to see how the dog was deployed on the streets of Luz or in Murat's (where "nothing of interest was found" as opposed to nothing at all) & b)would Eddie have alerted at under-bed area in 5D if Grime hadn't kept calling him away?https://youtu.be/c4NMYPsFKb8?
t=2608
I would also remind you that in the Deorr Kunz Jr. case a very experienced cadaver dog alerted to a buried dog which was wrapped in a towel, soaked in human blood belonging to a searcher who was very much alive at the time.
Frog,
DeleteYour comment is complex as it deals with 4 different topics separately. We asked about your opinion on 2 of them, and you returned 4. One would think you would be doing a JBLittlemore.
So, to be clear, your reply covers – not in this order – the following:
- Why didn’t Eddie alert other than McCann related objects/items, which we asked.
- Is stand-alone blood decomposition the same as human decomposition – the dead v live blood debate – which we also asked.
- Eddie supposedly alerted to blood at HDLG in Jersey, a subject that you’re now bringing in, which we consider to be a relevant one.
- The “very experienced cadaver dog” in the Deorr Kunz Jr. case, another subject you have brought in.
So, we believe you will understand that we are going to break up our response. We will start with what seems to be the most adverse to our beliefs, the HDLG alert.
In 2008, at Haut de La Garenne in Jersey, Eddie gave 3 alerts, 1 of which proved to be highly controversial and continues to be so.
What started as an investigation into child abuse became a homicide investigation, initially as the result of witness evidence and later because of an alert by Eddie.
2 alerts in the second phase at Victoria Towers were an alert to a recently disposed of paper tissue, said to have been used to clean up after sexual intercourse (with likely traces of blood) and to an accidental blood spillage from one of the research team.
Both Eddie, the EVR dog and the blood detection dog (unnamed in report but Keela) alerted to the tissue and the blood of a living person.
Martin Grime attributed both alerts to the presence of blood, within the training parameters of the EVDR.
The site at Victoria Towers had been infilled with soil and rubble in the 1970s and 1980s, presumably from elsewhere on the HDLG site. Then the site was excavated for the investigation.
The soil from HDLG was said to be contaminated with human bone remains, dating from the 1400s to 1950. The critics of Op R claim that these fragments dated back to the 1940s at least, and were not suggestive of recent homicides.
In the HDLG building, a fragment a forensic archaeologist initially thought could be a fragment of a juvenile human skull was found. The EVRD indicated the skull was human.
It was tested later in laboratories and said to be not bone and not human, possibly coconut husk or wood. This finding has been used to discredit Eddie by certain people.
The first 2 alerts referred to have been used by our critics to prove that Eddie alerted to blood from living people as well as cadaver odour.
Our contention is that Keela’s alerts to blood were correct but that Eddie’s alerts had another explanation; one not utilised by Grime.
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteEddie’s alert to the said non-human fragment were explained by Mr Thompson as possible contamination from the soil it was found in, if indeed, it proved to be non-human, as it ended up being proven it wasn’t.
As Mr Thompson then wrote “Bones were found at the original location of the alleged ‘coconut’ by workmen who were laying concrete but these bones were binned at the time. These bones will have been in contact with the said coconut, ergo Eddie was correct to alert to the location.”
To this extent we agree with Mr Thompson. And we are certain that you, an ardent subscriber of secondary contaminations, will also agree.
We also consider it likely Eddie was alerting to the ground contamination of cadaver, as the result of the previous infilling of the site contamination soil when he alerted to the blood and the tissue.
Eddie’s alert was not to the blood but to a cadaver contaminated tissue. Or both blood and tissue were contaminated. Secondary contaminations, not gaseous but physical contact between surfaces, a contaminated soil and a tissue and possibly the blood on that tissue.
Why Grime did not consider this possibility, we can’t say. Again, this a situation that only Martin Grime can clarify.
We don’t intend to get into further debate about the HDLG controversy about possible homicides and a cover-up. What we do know is that dreadful child abuse did occur as there have been criminal prosecutions. It also seems to be the case that attempts were made to cover- up abuse in HDLG.
We prefer to maintain our focus at the alerts by Eddie in relation to the ongoing blood/cadaver debate in the Maddie case.
The reply to the other 3 points will follow when we have time.
To readers wondering what the comment at 8 Nov 2019, 23:27:00 deleted by the Frog contained, it was almost in its entirety what would be submitted by her at 9 Nov 2019, 00:42:00.
DeleteThe new comment has just one clarification.
In the deleted comment she said “Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be blood - it's just part of a different mixture” and corrected this to “Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be decomposing blood - it's just part of a different mixture”.
Frog,
DeleteContinuing with what appears to be adverse against our beliefs from your comment, having address HGDL we move on to the “very experienced cadaver dog” in the Deorr Kunz Jr. case, another subject you have brought in, it seems it will backfire against you.
Quoting, as you have done in your comment at 9 Nov 2019, 18:34:00 (in reply to Anon 9 Nov 2019, 12:16:00, this article:
https://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/07/private-investigator-issues-lengthy-report-deorr-kunz-case/
“In June of 2016 investigators arrived in Leador, Id, and completed a five day targeted search. Investigators flew in Tracy Sargent and her dog “Chance” who is a well known and well respected searcher from the state of Georgia.
(…)
Tracy Sargent’ Report of Findings
Investigator Sargent reports the “Chance” whom is a trained cadaver dog hit five different unknown targets. Chance is trained on human decomposition and human blood pathogen decomposition.
The following are the hits (limited) :
(…)
3. 10 Feet Due East of camp site.
(…)
Area 3 : This area was excavated by hand – and found that a previous animal had been buried at this location. During the burial the subject who did the burial cut his hand and bled into a towel wrapped around the animal.”
*****
It does say that “Chance” whom is a trained cadaver dog” but then in the same paragraph says that “Chance is trained on human decomposition and human blood pathogen decomposition”.
Very, very clearly put that h was also a blood dog. Put as it should be put: upfront without any doubt. As it would absolutely have happened in the case Eddie was also a blood dog. But that didn’t happen, did it?
With Chance there’s no doubt that it is trained to alert to 2 distinct scents: human decomposition AND human blood pathogen decomposition.
Immediately it must be noted that there’s a clear distinction between the 2 decompositions, as we have defended all along. Human decomposition, which includes the blood in the body that decomposes together with it and in case it leaks outside the body it will have been contaminated by this decomposition, which we have called ‘dead blood’ and human blood pathogen decomposition, which is the decomposition of stand-alone blood, which we have called ‘live blood’.
This distinction between ‘dead’ and ‘live’ blood has only to do with the presence or absence of cadaver scent in the blood in question. Nothing to do with the scent of blood, regardless of its state of decomposition.
The blood has its own decomposition process. But if this blood hasn’t had any contact with the human decomposition, it won’t ever emit cadaver scent but will only emit the scent of human blood pathogen decomposition.
And it was to that Chance alerted to. As per its “job-description”. So nothing out of the ordinary or out of the expected.
Do show us where it was drawn the conclusion by investigation that the alert was not simply a blood alert.
And that is the point, once that it’s known that Chance may alert to blood as well as cadaver, all the alerts from this dog MUST take that into account.
It will be up to the investigation and the handler to determine beyond any reasonable doubt if an alert is blood or cadaver. In area 3, it seems to have been determined that it was due to ‘live’ blood. No cadaver.
You know what would be the simplest way for there not to have been any doubt? If Chance had only been trained to human decomposition.
In that case, there would be no question as to what he would be alerting to.
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteIf on one hand Chance serves as an example that relevant information about a dog’s capability is to be put forward in a clear and timely way, on the other it raises a very pertinent question about the naming of dogs, a subject which we will deal with better when we return to the FRESH blood experiment from the University of Technology Sydney, provided by you in these tweets:
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187454555287621632
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187454555287621632
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
For Textusa. Maybe this will help you with your blood conundrum. #mccann
http://matt-wand.utsacademics.info/publicns/Rust18.pdf
12:43 PM - 24 Oct 2019
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187758277557399552
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
For Textusa on #mccann(as you don't like publishing my replies)
If you read the paper you will see CADAVER dogs were used in experiments using FRESH blood. That's FRESH blood from a living person, not a dead person. Hope the lighbulb will be switched on.....
4:50 PM - 25 Oct 2019
Calling a dog a cadaver dog just because it alerts to human decomposition is not that simple and straightforward.
It is simple if the dog in question is solely trained for that but once it’s trained ALSO for blood, as are the dual purpose dogs, best known as Human Remain dogs (trained to find both live and dead human beings, for example in disaster areas) one takes away that exclusiveness and has to be aware and make others aware of this double capacity.
And Martin Grime did not call the attention to in anything similar while he was in Luz, and even where you say he does that – in the rogatory – it’s not as clear as it would MINIMALLY expected to be.
But still on the DeOrr case and cadaver dogs, let us transcribe this article:
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7045.240
“Investigator: Cadaver dogs alert on human remains at campground where DeOrr Kunz Jr. disappeared
Private investigator David Marshburn told KTVB authorities may have finally gotten the break in the case they have been waiting for.
Author: KTVB Staff
Published: 2:27 PM MDT June 27, 2019
Updated: 7:50 AM MDT June 28, 2019
LEADORE, Idaho — A pair of dogs specially trained to detect human remains have alerted on an area in the Lemhi County campground where an Idaho toddler vanished without a trace nearly four years ago, according to a private investigator.
DeOrr Kunz Jr., 2, went missing during a family trip to Timber Creek Campground near Leadore on July 10, 2015. Extensive searches of the area have turned up no sign of the boy.
But on Thursday, North Carolina-based private investigator David Marshburn told KTVB authorities may have gotten the break in the case they have been waiting for.
Marshburn said he was asked by family friends and community members to take the case. He said he took his two trained cadaver dogs up to the Timber Creek Campground June 8, searching the area for about a week. He said he was accompanied by Lemhi County Sheriff Steve Penner during the searches.
It took some time for his dogs to acclimatize to the thinner mountain air, Marshburn said, but on the third day, both dogs separately performed "a hard alert" on a specific area of the campground, indicating the presence of a body or remains. The dogs have been trained only to alert on human remains, not a decomposing animal, he said.
According to Marshburn, his dogs are trained only with human cadavers, human bone and teeth so they only alert to human remains. He also added that the dogs are trained to detect remains up to six feet underground.
(Cont)
(Cont)
Delete“Our dogs are cadaver dogs," he explained. "They find cadaver scent – human cadaver scent. So when they do an alert we are pretty confident that they’re finding remains of a human. But are we saying, or can we say it’s 100 percent DeOrr? No. Can we say it’s an Indian from way back? No. We don’t know what’s 100 percent there, we just know the confidence in our dogs that there is human remains of some sort there – it’s just, 'What?'”
The private investigator acknowledged the remains his dogs smelled could belong to someone other than the missing 2-year-old. But Marshburn stressed he was hired to locate DeOrr, and said he believes he has accomplished that.
"I feel it, the closure that everybody needed," he said. After Marshburn's dogs' alert, Penner also brought in an independent cadaver dog, which alerted on the same area of the campground, he said. Marshburn would not say specifically where in the campground the dogs alerted.
The next steps will be up to the Lemhi County Sheriff's Office and local law enforcement to identify exactly what the dogs found.
“I know my dogs and I know what we do and they have their past history of finding people and I’m pretty confident – we feel we have got what we need," Marshburn told KTVB. "And we went back and now the sheriff’s office has got to do their part.”
Marshburn owns a nonprofit called Search For Me Foundation, which deals with missing persons cases. To date, Marshburn said he and his dogs have been part of helping solve 13 cases.
He tells KTVB community members raised $1,900 to bring Marshburn and his team to Idaho to help with the case. The rest of the expenses were paid for out-of-pocket by he and his wife.
The Lemhi County Sheriff's Office announced Wednesday that the Timber Creek Campground will be closed Friday, June 28 through the weekend for a search connected to the DeOrr case..
The campsite was searched with cadaver dogs in the weeks after DeOrr went missing in 2015, but those dogs came up empty.
Former Lemhi County Sheriff Lynn Bowerman has said publicly that he believes DeOrr is dead and that he considers the toddler's parents to be suspects, a body has not been recovered, and no charges have ever been filed.
https://www.ktvb.com/article/news/investigator-cadaver-dogs-alert-on-human-remains-at-campground-where-deorr-kunz-jr-disappeared/277-b9dedc16-1e4d-4a63-b401-20b212b2f770
*****
Let us highlight what matters to the Eddie-the-blood-dog debate from the above:
“The dogs have been trained only to alert on human remains, not a decomposing animal, he said.
According to Marshburn, his dogs are trained only with human cadavers, human bone and teeth so they only alert to human remains. He also added that the dogs are trained to detect remains up to six feet underground.
“Our dogs are cadaver dogs," he explained. "They find cadaver scent – human cadaver scent. So when they do an alert we are pretty confident that they’re finding remains of a human. But are we saying, or can we say it’s 100 percent DeOrr? No. Can we say it’s an Indian from way back? No. We don’t know what’s 100 percent there, we just know the confidence in our dogs that there is human remains of some sort there – it’s just, 'What?'”
The private investigator acknowledged the remains his dogs smelled could belong to someone other than the missing 2-year-old. But Marshburn stressed he was hired to locate DeOrr, and said he believes he has accomplished that.
(….)
“I know my dogs and I know what we do and they have their past history of finding people and I’m pretty confident – we feel we have got what we need," Marshburn told KTVB. "And we went back and now the sheriff’s office has got to do their part.””
*****
Nothing about alerting to ‘live’ blood.
And are you sure you want to quote this case? It seems all points to parental involvement:
http://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2016/03/deorr-investigator-death-and-cover-up.html
Are YOU sure you wish to continue Martin Grime's own statement in which he confirmed both dogs (Eddie & Keela) would alert to dried blood from a living human? Even at a body farm, I don't think dogs were trained on either body parts or "cadaver" blood back in 2007.
DeleteFor the record, I don't believe either Jessica or Vernal know what happened to Deorr Jr. at the campground.
Frog,
DeleteOf course.
Frog,
DeleteWhile we wait for whatever you have to show us that you truly believe will demolish all our arguments, let’s continue to reply to your comment.
Having dealt with the 2 new subjects you brought in thinking they would be adverse to us, let us now deal with the 2 that were the core of the debate: why didn’t Eddie the supposedly blood dog not alert to any object/location related to the McCanns and if blood decomposition is the same as human decomposition.
This is what you replied about Eddie not having alerted anywhere else outside the McCanns:
“As far as Eddie's non-alerts to all things non-McCann...a)we haven't seen the video-recording to see how the dog was deployed on the streets of Luz or in Murat's (where "nothing of interest was found" as opposed to nothing at all) & b)would Eddie have alerted at under-bed area in 5D if Grime hadn't kept calling him away?https://youtu.be/c4NMYPsFKb8?
t=2608”
To be clear, Eddie was also deployed in the following places:
https://twitter.com/SadeElishaa/status/1141361443419430912
00Sade ๐ต️♀️ @SadeElishaa
๐Pop Quiz ๐
Q) Why wasn't Keela deployed to the following places after Eddie, where he did not alert: Murat's
Apt 5B, 5D, 5H, 4G (T7's)
Area surrounding OC (see pic)
#McCann
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D9buLewXYAImi0U.jpg
4:05 PM - 19 Jun 2019
[Picture attached is a screengrab from this link:
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DOGS_INSPECTION.htm
“The area surrounding the Ocean Club having been previously assessed with respect to place-names, soil characteristics and proximity to apartment 5A [refer Mark Harrison's report for details], the following areas were selected for search by the "cadaver" dog, all without results:
1 - Between 06h40 and 07h15 the area between Rua da Piteira and Rua da Oliveira;
2 - Between 07h25 and 07h45 the area immediately adjacent to the property known as "Beijaflor" in Rua da Figueira, which area was accessed through the electricity sub-station on Rua do Ramalhete;
3 - Between 07h55 and 08h05 the dirt road and area immediately adjacent to the residence known as "Casa Azul", in front of the residence known as "Casa Pandora", on Rua da Figueira;
4 - Between 08h20 and 08h40 the area between the residences known as "Casa Pandora" and "Quinta Mimosa", in front of the residence known as "Casa Ladeira".
Photographs and a map showing the areas is included in the report. The work stopped at 09h00.
08_VOLUME_VIIIa_Page_2058”]
*****
This means there were many more locations than the ones you mention that Eddie the “blood” dog “insisted” on producing false negatives to blood.
We remind you that for you to be right by insisting that Eddie was also a blood dog, there is on video footage of Eddie alerting to blood – according to you that is… – on the key FOB that was in the glove compartment of the passenger door from outside the Scenic, it means Eddie would so good that it would be expected to easily alert to any sample anywhere that had no obstacles between the sample and his nose.
For example, no one has ever let a single drop of blood in the kitchen of 5A because there is video footage of him searching all over it and alerting to nothing.
Again, do watch that piece of footage of Eddie alerting at the Scenic. It’s very clear that Eddie finds the source, completely undirected, returns, sniffs and confirms and only then does he bark. Imagine if that key FOB was just there on the floor in front of him, he would have barked feet away from it!
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteYou say you expected for there to be video footage of the non-alerts in the files. In 2007, video footage was not mandatory (not sure if it is today) and was enough to name the subject-matter experts were present during the diligences who would later certify that all relevant data would be mentioned, to ensure its legal validity.
We have already explained that into a judicial file in Portugal, only go in the documents the investigation deems to be pertinent to the dispatching decision. All deemed unimportant is considered that if included serves only to confuse the decider. That means that even if there was footage, Eddie not alerting in various and diverse locations would have the same fate as all the statements from all those individuals who were questioned and replied “sorry, saw nothing suspicious at all…” which was to not be included in the process. They were questioned, they replied but the PJ considered them not pertinent for the dispatching decision.
When you imply that Martin Grime was being a compromised, or at the very least a very sloppy professional, you also imply that all those present were in cahoots with him.
Indeed, he THE subject-matter expert on the dog alerts but those present were not picked out of thin air to be present in the diligences with him. They were experienced police officers fully aware of the importance and high profile of the case and their presence was to certify that what Martin Grime and his dogs did all that was to be done in each of the diligences. They were not there to make sure he did his job, as we imagine that was what expected, but there to help him to his job the best way possible. Make sure he obeyed every single Portuguese SOP in the matter as well as be on the lookout if he missed something. The case was that important.
For example, what you have mentioned in your comment as an example of Grime interfering with Eddie’s searching, in the example you have put forward in your comment and which we were unable to see him keeping calling him away, it would be the duty of those others present to request Grime that the bedroom be searched again. No one did, all were satisfied as to how the searches went in that apartment.
But going right into that example, what are you implying exactly? You appear to be clearly implying that Grime knew beforehand that there was cadaver/blood scent under that bed in that particular room of apartment 5D and was making sure that Eddie would not alert there.
The first obvious question is, how would he have that information?
Was he given a list of places of where Eddie could alert and he was tasked to make sure Eddie did not alert in them? Did he memorise it all?
And what would he do if Eddie reacted like he did at the Scenic, detecting a scent and going back to be certain he had indeed picked up one before he alerted, would Grime say in front of all “no, Eddie, not THERE, don’t look THERE, look HERE, it’s much better to look HERE, come here you good boy…”?
And why would Grime protect the remainder of the T9 over the McCanns? Why single the McCann out in the group? Why not either cover-up for the entire group or do his job and just direct his dogs to search for evidence pertinent to the case, irrelevant as to who would be compromised by the alerts?
(Cont)
(Cont)
DeleteCan you see how ridiculous your proposal is? Your premise is that Martin Grime is not only a compromised professional, as he knows beforehand what and where to avoid and that he will be able to fool the professionals accompanying him during all the diligences and direct the dogs only against the McCanns, all this in a case with literally the entire world looking upon him and his dogs.
If you are implying the Portuguese professionals who accompanied him were in cahoots with him, what reason could they have to let off the hook the other T7 and just focus on the McCanns?
You are entitled to your opinion and that is to be respected. If your opinion is to be taken seriously is a totally different matter. As far as we are concerned, it isn’t and we have to say that we doubt seriously that it is taken seriously by anyone.
But the crux of the question remains: why hasn’t Eddie the blood dog alerted to blood anywhere else other than locations not related to the McCanns? We are still waiting for a convincing explanation from you (or from any of those defending like you that Eddie is also a blood dog and who have apparently gone into "hiding").
Post Scriptum.
If you think Martin Grime was such a compromised professional, why do suddenly believe what he says (or to be very precise, what is said that he said) when it comes to dried ‘live’ blood?
You of all people should be the first one to doubt Martin Grime even when he said that Eddie was a dog!
Frog,
DeleteAs you might imagine, we left for last in our replies the ‘live’ v ‘dead’ blood debate because it is what out of your comment, what benefits our arguments the most and in what a way!
Honestly, we could not believe our eyes when we saw that you wrote the following:
“Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be decomposing blood - it's just part of a different mixture
If I bake a carrot cake, the carrot doesn't cease to be carrot after cooking it with other ingredients. A dog trained to alert to carrot will give a positive response, whatever the state of the carrot.”
And it wasn’t accidental as this was the bit in your initial comment that you would withdraw where you went to the trouble of clarifying: from (our caps) “Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be blood” to “Decomposing blood mixed with cadaver scent doesn't cease to be DECOMPOSING blood”.
To be honest, we didn’t understand the clarification because the initial statement did make perfect sense as it was but by adding “decomposing” to it you made it even clearer: decomposing blood + whatever = continues to be decomposing blood in its essence.
Then you used the carrot cake example, and about that there’s only one thing we can say: we couldn’t have written it better. That’s why we couldn’t believe what we were reading!
Let’s use your own words to explain what happens with blood:
If blood is subjected to human decomposition, the blood doesn't cease to be blood after being mixed with other elements of human decomposition. A dog trained to alert to blood will give a positive response, whatever the state of the blood.
See how your words make perfect sense in the ‘live’ v ‘dead’ blood context?
Keela will always alert to blood whatever its state of decomposition and will ignore the scent of other elements of human decomposition (in your analogy other ingredients) that may be mixed with it.
Really easy to understand, thanks to you.
Similarly, a dog trained to alert to other elements of human decomposition will give a positive response to that mixture although it is not reacting to the scent of blood in the mixture but tohose other elements of human decomposition or as JBLittlemore defined them: “decomp components”.
Decomp components that “afflict” the blood, according to him.
Two different dogs reacting to 2 different scents in the same mixture (same object) which is predominantly made up of blood. Your words have made it all so easy to understand.
Continuing to use your analogy, it then becomes very easy to establish the difference between ‘live’ and ‘dead’ blood.
‘Live’ blood would be your cake being made exclusively out of carrots, and in whatever state the cake may be in after having been left on a counter for days or weeks, whatever state of decomposition it will continue to only have carrots and a dog trained to alert to carrot will give a positive response to it, as you said.
‘Dead’ blood would be the above but the cake would have other ingredients. Those ingredients can only be introduced in the “cake” once decomp components afflict the blood. Or in your words, contaminate the blood.
In your analogy, a dog trained to alert to carrot would continue to give a positive response, whatever the state of the carrots because the cake continued to contain carrot AND a dog trained to alert to the other ingredients would also give a positive response having nothing to with carrots, to the cake.
The ingredient dog would not alert to the cake made exclusively out of carrots, or in terms of blood, he would not alert to ‘live blood’.
Now, can you please explain why you wrote this?
https://twitter.com/FragrantFrog/status/1187373061789667330
Green Leaper ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ ๐ @FragrantFrog
Replying to @Jules1602xx @MrDelorean2 @xxSiLverdoexx
Ah yes...that would be the blood dog which only alerted to dried blood from a living human because we all *know* that blood smells totally different to that from a cadaver..๐คช๐คก #mccann
3:19 PM - 24 Oct 2019
So what you're saying is that if someone bleeds, then later they die from their injuries elsewhere, Eddie wouldn't alert to the blood that was spilled originally because it wasn't mixed with "cadaver". This is bullshit for two reasons. The first bring that Eddie didn't alert to "cadaver". You show your ignorance by your insistence of repeating this. The second reason is that Eddie alerted to dried blood whether it came from a dead or a living person, hence his title of E.V.R.D. You've managed to understand what the "E" stands for, but think about the V.R.D. Victim Recovery Dog. Used for recovering victims who may not have died, but might be findable having suffered life threatening injuries. THAT is what a VRD dog is, now get a fucking life or at the very least, stop accusing Martin Grime of being a liar.
DeleteAnonymous 11 Nov 2019, 14:18:00,
DeleteSo now Eddie “Eddie didn't alert to "cadaver"”.
How interesting.
Now Eddie has gone from being a cadaver dog to being a blood dog only!
But by all means, can you tell us all why Eddie the blood dog did not alert to blood anywhere else but to objects/locations related to the McCanns?
Thank you.
A cadaver is a dead body. Think about it?
DeleteI'm not one for long-winded posts, Textusa so I'll just make the following few points. The dogs were trained on decomposing blood from a living human, not a cadaver.It was not possible for Grime to obtain "cadaver" blood in the UK.
DeleteJust as a cadaver dog will not alert to a freshly deceased human which has not produced enough VOC's for the HRDD/VRD to detect, the dog will not alert to fresh blood from a living human until a certain level of decomposition has occurred. The HRDD/VRD/blood dog can isolate the smell of decomposing blood with or without the presence of cadaver odour (the latter, of course, varies considerably according to post-mortem interval) in the same way it can detect the carrot in the cake, whatever the state of the cake.
What good is a VRD if it can't detect blood spray at a potential crime scene - a blood loss which can only occur whilst the heart is still pumping blood around the body?
With reference to my tweet - I was being facetious.
With reference to all the alerts - they can only ever be proven correct, not incorrect, after a live deployment. If Madeleine is proven to be alive/have been alive when she left 5A, how many bodyless convictions Grime was involved in could become subject to appeal?
Frog,
Delete“The HRDD/VRD/blood dog can isolate the smell of decomposing blood with or without the presence of cadaver odour”
Could you provide a link for that?
So, if we understood you correctly. Eddie alerts to “decomposing” irrelevant of being blood from a human being or from a cadaver? Is that what you are saying?
The rest we will reply in due time.
Eddie was an EVRD dog. He alerted to the resulting scent of the breakdown of volatile organic compounds. He would also alerted to the scent of dried blood from a living human being. Martin Grime was tasked with looking for a evidence of a death, Madeleine's death. He wasn't tasked with doing a detailed, close search for microscopic amounts of blood belonging to any Tom, Dick and Harry in every location. How long do you think that would have taken? The Portuguese couldn't and wouldn't have granted a budget for that. If you don't think Eddie alerted to dried blood from a living human being, then please explain why Eddie alerted to dried blood on tissues used to clean up after sex in a shelter at the jersey care home. You claim Eddie alerted to cadaver only. Why was Martin Grime satisfied there had been no dead body, only dried blood that was from a living human on a tissue?
DeleteI'll wait!
Anonymous 11 Nov 2019, 14:43:00,
DeleteReally??? ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ
You don’t say!! ๐คฏ๐คฏ๐คฏ๐คฏ๐คฏ๐คฏ๐คฏ
Anonymous 11 Nov 2019, 14:58:00,
DeleteRead our comment at 9 Nov 2019, 12:40:00.
@14:58
DeleteYou didn’t read Sadie’s pop quiz either, as that shows the wider areas searched by Eddie.
Who said the PJ had a budget for the dog searches that precludes Eddie from searching any areas that Harrison and Grime considered relevant when searching for a body or the scent of a body?
I'm fully aware of the wider areas searched. Do you seriously believe the PJ didn't work to budgets? Even the richest country's police forces work to budgets.
DeleteTextusa, I've read your comment and it bears no relevance to the tissue (the type you blow your nose on) that was found in the shelter. So please, look it up and when you do, please reply as succinctly as any other person would. It doesn't require an essay. Also, try to avoid the childish use of emojis as they only serve to bite you when you're wrong.
Anonymous 11 Nov 2019, 16:23:00,
DeleteWe are well aware what a tissue is, all of us having had colds recently.
What other sort of tissue would be used to clean up, as referred to in the response?
Succinct enough?
Succinct, yes, but you're avoiding the main question like it IS a cold. You claim Eddie only alerted to blood it had been contaminated from being in a dead body. So can you explain this regarding the dried blood found on the tissue in the shelter and marked as V/T 9
Delete"EVRD – positive indication. SOCO visual – positive. Blood dog - positive indication. Visual – positive UV – negative (items removed prior to screening).
Quasar - negative
Positive indications confirmed as being recently deposited tissues used to clean up after sex by unknown persons. Offences not suspected at this stage. Retained as exhibit should there be future reports of offences. There will be no forensic submission at this stage."
What this clear my shows is that a scenes of crime officer gave visual confirmation of blood, Eddie (EVRD) alerted to the blood, and Keela alerted. It also states no crimes were thought to have been committed, so that rules out a dead body.
Anonymous 11 Nov 2019, 18:07:00,
DeleteCould you please describe what you consider to be a visual confirmation of cadaver scent?
By the way, have we denied that blood was found on the tissue? What we have argued is that the alert from Eddie was not to that blood but to contamination from the soil on the tissue.
Very much like with the key FOB, Eddie alerted to cadaver scent on it and Keela to the blood.
By the way... budget constraints in the Maddie case in 2007?
DeleteYou really are a comedian.
Has angry anon actually read the comment about the Jersey findings in your response to Frog?
DeleteHe seems to have missed it or totally ignored it as an explanation for Eddie’s 2 alerts, to the tissue and the blood from one of the investigators.
This is really very simple:
DeleteThe dog would give an alert to dried human blood. This is hardly surprising as human blood was used in it's training.Your insistence that the alert MUST have been to cadaveric contamination of the blood is solely down to your blind refusal to consider that an alert given by that dog could have any other possible explanation than the presence of a cadaver at that very spot. It's pathetic, frankly.
Anonymous 11 Nov 2019, 18:28:00,
DeleteSo the visual confirmation of cadaver scent is the dog alerting to dried human blood, because it was... dry?
Yes, that makes perfect sense. Why didn't we see that before?
Did I mention visual confirmation?
DeleteIn your comment at 11 Nov 2019, 18:07:00
Delete“What this clear my shows is that a scenes of crime officer gave visual confirmation of blood, Eddie (EVRD) alerted to the blood”
And we asked what would be for you visual confirmation of cadaver scent.
Anonymous 11 Nov 2019, 18:47:00,
DeleteBy the way, do you disagree with Mr Thompson that Eddie’s alert to the fragment, originally thought to be from a skull, may have been the result of contamination from human bone contaminated soil which had been in contact with the fragment?
"Visual confirmation of cadaver contaminant?" You've just made that up, plucked it from thin air. It was visual confirmation of blood. You can't see the smell of a dead body. As for budgets, are you telling me the PJ had an unlimited budget? Again, you're being silly, in fact no, you're just a troll who enjoys lying about the case of a missing child. You need to get a job and do something useful with your pitiful existence.
DeleteNo forensics were taken. No suspicion of a crime in that area, yet you think the blood of a dead person was confirmed by an officer. That's crazy talk.
Delete...and for the love of God. What the fuck has your obsession with Ben got to do with any of this, apart from the FACT he and several others have shown you up to be an outrageous liar? Perhaps you should concentrate on facts instead of trying to argue night is day.
DeleteAnonymous 11 Nov 2019, 19:34:00,
DeleteAnonymous 11 Nov 2019, 19:35:00,
Anonymous 11 Nov 2019, 19:38:00,
Sorry, you said the alert was blood because there was visual confirmation of blood and so it had to be blood.
Using your logic, for there EVER to be an alert to cadaver that has to be visual confirmation of cadaver contaminant. Yes, fully aware that it’s not visible, just highlighting the flaw in your dogmatic logic.
Did the PJ have unlimited budget in 2007 for Maddie? Obviously, yes.
Please tell us where we have said that it was the blood of a dead officer. Thank you.
We see that you haven’t said if you agree or disagree with Mr Thompson.
https://twitter.com/Cerb32/status/1193909568906186752
DeleteCerb32 @Cerb32
Replying to @gkylilghost @Ntown1976Nick and 27 others
Eddie was only given the #mccann clothes to check. The PJ should have included clothes from other sources to make a fair test and to reduce the risk of a false positive.
3:13 PM - 11 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/gkylilghost/status/1193910072478437376
geeky little ghost @gkylilghost
Replying to @Cerb32 @Ntown1976Nick and 27 others
Did he check other cars? Apartments??
3:15 PM - 11 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1193927413325021185
00The Jules... ๐ต️♀ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx
Replying to @gkylilghost @Cerb32 and 27 others
Yes he did funnily enough..No alerts..
4:24 PM - 11 Nov 2019
*****
Eddie, the REALLY LOUSY blood dog!
No, I said it was blood because it was visually confirmed as such, that Eddie and Keela both confirmed it as such, that it was concluded that there was no evidence of a crime, AND that as such there was no need for further forensics. Now unless you know better and think a single tissue would be used to clean a minute amount of blood after a death, but was then left at the crime scene along with the semen of the perpetrator, then you're making it up, along with your claim that someone here said it was the blood of a dead officer. As for Ben, if I wanted to debate the dogs with him it would stand to reason that I'd leave a comment on his blog. As you seem to have quite the fixation with him, why don't you do the same?
DeleteOh, and no budget constraints? Really? So they had an unlimited amount of money, did they? Behave yourself!
DeleteI'm surprised the people of Portugal who were in a state of austerity didn't demand the money be spent on feeding the poor instead.
DeleteSerious question - do you do anything all day except sit and obsess about this case and copy other people's tweets? You don't appear to be employed, you are far too interested in the private lives of others, and you seem to enjoy deceiving people. None of this is normal behaviour.
Deletehttp://cadaverdog.com/Articles/article/cross-training-a-dog.html
DeleteSo, according to angry anon, Eddie is now a cross-trained dog! But look what is said about evidence in court.
How convenient for the Mcs if Eddie could be proved to be a cross-trained dog.
Textusa11 Nov 2019, 14:58:00
DeleteFrog,
“The HRDD/VRD/blood dog can isolate the smell of decomposing blood with or without the presence of cadaver odour”
Could you provide a link for that?
So, if we understood you correctly. Eddie alerts to “decomposing” irrelevant of being blood from a human being or from a cadaver? Is that what you are saying?
-----------------------------------------------
Yes. Eddie was trained separately on decomposing human blood obtained from a path lab, not a corpse.
Of course, if you want to go down the road of decomposing pigs' blood versus decomposing human blood when it came to Eddie's alerts then be my guest. A dog cross-trained on animal remains cannot be classed as a human remains detection dog
According to the article, cross trained dogs must be taught different alerts, “one for live finds, one for drowning etc.”
DeleteGrime makes no mention of Eddie being cross-trained or using different alerts. The only alert mentioned is that he barks.
Rather sickening to see the so-called 'Anti-McCanns' rush in with such savagery to try and prove the dogs were cross-trained and multi-talented. Next we'll hear them say Keela was also a cadaver dog. Logic doesn't come into it.
DeleteWe hope readers enjoyed yesterday’s debate. We did.
DeleteInsulting comments interspersed with deliberate misrepresentation about what had been said, plus swerving answering questions.
All signs of losing the argument.
And so typical of Mr Thompson and NotTextusa.
An upside to this is that FINALLY Jules has correctly anticipated something:
https://twitter.com/Jules1602xx/status/1189269048519004161
00The Jules... ๐ต️♀ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ ๐ ๐ธ @Jules1602xx
Replying to @FragrantFrog
Cheeky lol.. Anyone is a threat to their credibility, but esp JBL.. Oh and NT.. Who I'm sure will be wiping the floor with them soon.. ๐
7:53 PM - 29 Oct 2019
If one considers “soon” to be 13 days, then yes, she was finally correct on the return of NotTextusa. Finally, Jules has said something would happen and, surprisingly, it did happen. Now we just have to wait for the pictures of the BRT and Mr Thompson’s return to Twitter.
If NotTextusa wiped the floor with us or not, we’ll leave it up to the readers to judge although having said how much we enjoyed seeing him struggle, is an indication of our opinion on that subject.
We are showing this because it shows this “ambush” was prepared. We already knew that their last powder-shot in the attack to make Eddie be a blood dog, would be the tissue alert at HDLG.
A subject we had investigated but have avoided for the reasons expressed in our first comment about it.
And NotTextusa was not prepared for us being prepared, so he opted to confuse people regarding HDLG.
So, to simplify:
There is no dead officer. The blood was from a search team member.
There was no suggestion the tissue was in contact with a recent cadaver.
The proposal is that both alerts by both dogs were to a porous tissue with blood from a living person and a living search member’s blood on ground contaminated by historical human bone deposits.
Both dogs made positive alerts to “a small human blood deposit confirmed as being an accidental spillage by one of the search team.”
Earlier it was said by Grime “human remains deposited within the ground in that area would contaminate the ground and any porous material within it…”
Although Grime wasn’t referring to the Victoria Tower here, we are proposing that the soil here was similarly contaminated and the tissue was a porous material on contaminated ground. Likewise, the blood of one of the search team found on the ground.
So the blood dog alerted to blood, correctly.
Eddie, the cadaver dog, alerted to soil contamination from historic bone deposits on the tissue and the search member’s blood found on the contaminated ground. Eddie alerted correctly as a cadaver dog.
Frog,
DeleteAre you being facetious in your comment at 11 Nov 2019, 22:12:00?
It’s important that is clarified.
PS. Noted you haven’t provided the link, nor have provided any links to the claim that “Eddie was trained separately on decomposing human blood obtained from a path lab, not a corpse.”
Are we to take your word for it?
Unpublished Anonymous at 12 Nov 2019, 14:47:00,
DeleteYou should read this and inform yourself about the blood from a search team member because we think you’re confused about Op Rectangle.
http://voiceforprotest.blogspot.com/2010/03/operation-rectangle-summary-report.html
We were not referring to the PJ officer in the Mc case, whose blood was found in the apartment.
We referred to a member of the search team in Op Rectangle who shed blood in the Victoria Towers site in HDLG.
@Textusa 13.24.00
DeleteIt's a logical conclusion. The dog would only alert to substances within its training parameters. Eddie was trained on decomposing porcine material, which included pigs' blood. Of course, if you believe Eddie could have confused decomposing pigs' blood with human blood, you are doing the dog a disservice, aren't you?
Frog,
DeleteAh, a logical conclusion. Using your logic, plucked out of your head.
No, we are not are not doing a dog a disservice.
It is not we who have the necessary qualifications to say that uneviscerated piglet remains are similar to human decomposition but we imagine those in the British scientific community with the responsibility for the accreditation of cadaver dogs to make such an assessment, do.
We would say that with your words you are doing a big disservice to that scientific community, but that is entirely up to you.
By the way, you are aware that Eddie trained with human cadavers in the US, are you not?
And also, as you haven’t, could you clarify if you were facetious in that particular comment, it’s important that we know if you were.
I recommend you read, in full, Grime's 2018 White Paper, Textusa, paying particular attention to page 53/187.
DeleteHopefully all will become clearer to you.
http://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4750/
DeleteFrog,
DeleteI imagine you mean this paragraph:
“Only detection canine resources trained specifically in the detection of human decomposition may provide reliable intelligence. Resources trained with the inclusion of animal-based training aids provide a far wider interpretation of canine responses that must include the source may equally be animal or human. If detection canine training is inclusive of food-based pork products this widens the interpretation spectrum to include foodstuff.”
The White Paper was written in 2018, the uneviscerated piglet was what was the standards set by the accreditation authorities in 2007.
It’s up to the British authorities to guarantee, then and now, that the nation’s police has the necessary and appropriate means to accomplish the missions the canine units are assigned.
Irrelevant of that, Eddie in 2007 acted in accordance to the 2018 standards as he was trained in the US.
No, I meant the paragraph which started "It is widely accepted as being impossible to extinguish conditioned odour recognition....."
Delete"It is widely accepted asbeing impossible to extinguish conditioned odour recognition from a detection canine olfactory repertoire. Therefore, such animals will not be classified as properly trained, or proficient, within today’s acceptable parameters. The use of such resources will be easily discredited within judicial process. When considering the working life of these canines may be 8-10 years this does not represent good Value for Money. Nor does it reflect well on the British Police Service reputation regarding due diligence in relation to scientific development and improvement."
DeleteRepeating ourselves:
"The White Paper was written in 2018, the uneviscerated piglet was what was the standards set by the accreditation authorities in 2007.
It’s up to the British authorities to guarantee, then and now, that the nation’s police has the necessary and appropriate means to accomplish the missions the canine units are assigned.
Irrelevant of that, Eddie in 2007 acted in accordance to the 2018 standards as he was trained in the US."
From Page 54:
Delete“It should always be borne in mind that there may be innocent and logical explanations for VRD responses not connected to criminal activity:
•Historical remains
•Direct or indirect transference of odour by persons having contact with human remains professionally.
•Persons recently in contact with deceased relatives
•Items of furniture from deceased persons dwelling”
*****
Funny, no mention of the possibility of the alert being blood from a living human being…
Wouldn’t THAT be right at the top of the list taking into account that if EVR dogs alerted to living human blood?
The CSI officers don't need a dog to find human blood.
DeleteReally??
DeleteAnd yet, according to you Grime had TWO dogs to do just that in Praia da Luz...
Grime's task was to use the VRD primarily to locate a body or provide intelligence as to where one may have been temporarily deposited.
DeleteCSI officers had already examined 5A immediately after Madeleine was taken. Didn't they do their job properly iyo?
Fragrant Frog,
DeleteJust wondering what you actually believe regarding Madeleine, do you believe she's still alive? Or that she died somewhere else & not in 5A?
Thanks in advance,
Random Observer
Frog 20:50,
Deletehttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/15966054/
Numerous applications of water to a surface will make luminol ineffective. If the blood is not detectable to the naked eye or to luminol, a blood detecting dog can detect what a human can’t.
Please don’t blame the Portuguese police for failing to detect what Keela was able to locate.
But you’re now going to argue there was no evidence the cellular material found was blood?
Can everyone see where this is heading on the arguments so far, from various quarters.
The blood dog didn’t detect blood.
It was only cellular material, which could have been skin cells.
The cadaver dog wasn’t a cadaver dog. He was a cross-trained dog who also searched for living people.
He alerted to pig remains because he couldn’t be retrained for cadaver. odour.
He alerted to blood shed by living humans.
All of the alerts explained away.
Frog,
DeleteIt’s our opinion that all who were involved in the forensics of the case in Praia da Luz, both human and canine, did their jobs brilliantly and very professionally.
Note, we said “in Praia da Luz” as this opinion does not extend elsewhere.
If there’s any criticism, we would say that the Portuguese forensic experts should have asked the British ones who told them (not suggested) how the samples should be collected to leave the premises.
Anonymous 11 Nov 2019, 14:58:00
Delete“He alerted to the resulting scent of the breakdown of volatile organic compounds.”
?
I’ll wait.
Anonymous 13 Nov 2019, 18:32:00,
DeleteSeriously? Is that all you've got?
Random Observer 12 Nov 2019, 23:43:00
DeleteI 100% don't believe Madeleine died in 5A. Whether or not she is alive now depends on the reason she was taken on 3rd May 2007 and if it would benefit someone to ensure she remains alive.
Anonymous 13 Nov 2019, 10:04:00
DeleteThe potential crime scene had been contaminated prior to Eddie & Keela's arrival both before & after the McCanns holidayed in it. Therefore, any cleaning using a bleaching product could not be directly attributed to the McCanns. Likewise, blood & bloody bodily fluids could have been deposited after the Portuguese CSI team had done their sweep on 4th May.
I'm not going to argue about the type of bodily fluid/cellular material sent for testing as it was clearly of insufficient quality & quantity for the FSS to run all the relevant tests. Obtaining a DNA profile from each sample was surely the priority.
Whatever you may believe, Grime himself has now stated that a dog cross-trained on animal products is not a human remains detection dog. However he was not cross-trained to find living humans using generic human scent.
One wonders what your opinion of the dog alerts will be if Madeleine is found alive. Grime has covered his defence well in his 2018 White Paper.
Researching all her “facts” for conflicting results is what is keeping Frog alive. Shameful.
DeleteTo the frog,where is it written about a cadaver dog alerting to a buried dog,the private investigator employed by the family of the child (Deorr Kunz JR) only confirms dogs alerted.The private investigator now believes the family were involved.
ReplyDeleteKlein: I’m not going to discuss where it was or the circumstances around it because it will be an integral part of the prosecution, and I don’t want to the hurt the prosecution, but a cadaver dog did hit. That has never been announced before, but we’re announcing it today because we feel the public needs to know.
Area 3..taken from Philip Klein's full report released July 2016...
Deletehttps://www.eastidahonews.com/2016/07/private-investigator-issues-lengthy-report-deorr-kunz-case/
Tracy Sargent’ Report of Findings
Investigator Sargent reports the “Chance” whom is a trained cadaver dog hit five different unknown targets. Chance is trained on human decomposition and human blood pathogen decomposition.
The following are the hits (limited) :
1. “Diaper Tree Area” – This is the area to which it was testified that “a diaper” was hung in the tree in the campground.
2. 139 Feet East of the Cattle Guard in the camp ground – in a loose ground area.
3. 10 Feet Due East of camp site.
4. 2.24 miles due Northeast of the 15 mp stake, in the ravine near 221 southeast fence.
5. Camp site ground .75 miles due East of the camp ground.
Area 1 : There was no evidence obtained.
Area 2 : Excavation was undertaken by LE and KIC – this area needs to be further exhumed and was turned over to Law Enforcement for further investigation by their team.
Area 3 : This area was excavated by hand – and found that a previous animal had been buried at this location. During the burial the subject who did the burial cut his hand and bled into a towel wrapped around the animal.
Area 4 : Investigators have turned this area over to law enforcement.
Area 5 : Investigators believe this site may have been a “holding site” for some type of human body.
There was no other evidence found.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Cadaver dogs also alerted at the campground back in the summer (see David Marshburn's deployments) but still no confirmation human remains have been located at any of the alert points.
The Ponce of Dubai falsely accuses more people of being paedophiles, sex offenders and having disabilities than anyone else on twitter. Her and her gang's racist abuse of travelling communities being peg sellers and tarmac layers has been unrelenting since @LoverandomIeigh joined twitter. See @LoverandomIeigh's timeline to see the disgusting use of a severely disabled ginger haired male's photograph to see how sick she is. She alleged the male was @LoverandomIeigh's partner and father of her children. I will not post the link, as the male featured will be unaware the photograph of him has been abused in this malicious manner. See @Strackers74's timeline to see how she and her friends have also been stalked and abused by Ponce of Dubai and her gang.
ReplyDeleteThe Ponce of Dubai
@The_Truth_II
Replying to
@forgedaboutitt
@TrollBusterXXX
and 2 others
@TrollBusterXXX
suggesting someone is a paedo to try to scare them into dropping their challenge to a known #cyberbully who’s pulling Steve’s strings
9:40 AM · Nov 8, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
3
Likes
What I wonder about most in this case is whether or not the hoax participants ever feel any sense of guilt for what they've done. The way I see it is if one knows the truth then all of them know exactly what became of the non missing child.
ReplyDeleteHow do they sleep at night knowing the fraud that's been committed on a global scale? It simply beggars belief for those of us who live in the real world.
What do you think, Textusa? How do they function normally and live with the secret knowledge of the century?
Anonymous 9 Nov 2019, 16:48:00,
DeleteWe don’t think we can answer that question, or even attempt to try.
All we can say is that they don’t behave in public in the way one would expect and that’s all. How they behave in private is another matter and it only concerns them.
We won’t give our opinion on their mental state as not only we’re not qualified to do so as we don’t think we should even if we were.
There are a lot of people involved in this sorry affair who should be feeling the weight of their guilt.
Telling the truth at the very beginning would probably have been easier in the long run. Any normal person who knows the truth has to feel disturbed on some level considering at least one investigation is hanging over their heads.
DeleteAnd quite frankly, none of them know for sure that the truth won't be revealed in glorious technicolor at some point in the future. There's no guarantee that someone on the outside won't find out and spill the beans.
In other words, it's not over till the fat lady sings, and nothing stays secret forever.
One tactic our critics use very, very often is to make claims without providing links.
ReplyDeleteThis is not done innocently. Not at all.
The primary objective is obvious to all and that is to gain with time what can be gained, as the Portuguese say “enquanto o pau vai e vem, folgam as costas” (our translation, while the club goes and comes back, the back rests).
They make the claim, we ask for a link, and while we wait for them to provide it the claim has registered in readers’ brains.
As we live in the age of selective hearing – we allow ourselves to hear concurrent opinions and naturally reject even without hearing what are perceived as opposing views – this tactic is quite effective, as it feeds into what Robert Ailes said “people don't want to be informed they only need to feel they have been informed.”
But this is not their sole objective with this, sometimes it’s taken a step further. Very subtle and very effective and that is to use what is apparently true against the truth.
Let’s see if the reader can spot it in this comment submitted yesterday which is the perfect example of the above and we did not publish because we wanted to single it out for this very reason:
“Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Blood and the EVR dog - Part 6 - comments continue...":
Anon 21:18 All alerts need to be corroborated by forensics otherwise they cannot be used in a criminal court. This is made very clear by Martin Grime every single time he discusses the alerts. He also clearly states that the alerts could be to EITHER of the two things Eddie alerts to. Please look for yourself instead of taking the word of a blogger who has very limited knowledge of the dogs or their training.
Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 11 Nov 2019, 22:46:00”
*****
We believe the reader will most likely be baffled as to why we didn’t publish this comment then and there as besides a very unusually bland insult, the rest of the content seems relevant and pertinent to the case. Why we didn’t publish it is what we intend to explain with this comment.
The first reaction on reading it is to think that Martin Grime never said “that the alerts could be to EITHER of the two things Eddie alerts to”, so the expected reaction would be to provoke us into calling the bluff and demand a quote.
And if we had done that we would have fallen into the trap.
Not we wouldn’t debunk that statement but while we were going to the trouble of doing that, the readers would have registered that Martin Grime had indeed said that the alerts (note plural) could be either of 2 things (blood or cadaver) and that would immediately validate the phrase “the two things Eddie alerts to” (blood and cadaver), creating in readers minds the idea that Eddie was INDEED also a blood dog and to those who are against us, that would be all they needed to read.
To understand, one has to read the quote with which we are certain Anonymous would return with and that would be this from Martin Grime about the canine vehicle searches in August 2007: “It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to ‘cadaver scent’ contaminant or human blood scent. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.”
Grime clearly says “‘cadaver scent’ contaminant or human blood scent” which would prove that we were wrong and that would absolutely prove that Eddie is indeed a blood dog, right?
What the reader would have missed, and THAT was the intent, would be the plural v singular in Grime’s words and that detail is what makes the whole difference.
So, we ask the reader to read the comment again and see that it says (our caps) “He also clearly states that the ALERTS could be to either of the two things Eddie alerts to” and it intentionally doesn’t say (our caps) “He also clearly states that AN ALERT could be to either of the two things Eddie alerts to”.
See the difference? Subtle but very importance and so intentionally inducing into falsehood.
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteIt should be AN ALERT and not ALERTS because Martin Grime gives this opinion ONLY to ONE alert and that is Eddie’s alert in the Scenic.
Why is that? Why is Grime raising the possibility that this PARTICULAR alert from Eddie can be from blood but doesn’t raise similar concern about all the other alerts: bedroom, living-room, back-yard, cuddle-cat and McCann clothing?
Isn’t that strange, to say the least?
We have already spoken about these specific words from Grime and promised we would speak about them when we write about the operational use of the dogs, because they are indeed important but their importance has to contextualised.
For now, we just want to highlight how our critics – “antis” who are so desperate to prove that Eddie is also a blood dog so that his alerts at the Scenic can be dismissed – intended to goad us by using Grime’s words – that he indeed said – against Eddie in all his alerts.
If we had published the comment, the ‘conversation’ would have gone much like this:
Anonymous (in comment): “This is made very clear by Martin Grime every single time he discusses the alerts. He also clearly states that the alerts could be to EITHER of the two things Eddie alerts to.”
Us: “Please provide a link or a quote for that statement, thank you.”
Anonymous: “You want a quote? It just shows how you haven’t even read the files! Here it is, Martin Grimes own words: “It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to ‘cadaver scent’ contaminant or human blood scent”. Now try and twist that you fool!”
Note that the previous sentence, which refers to whether alerts would need forensic corroboration ends in plural “alerts” and this links up nicely to the plural “alerts” to be used in the deceiving sentence. Neat, isn’t it? Quite seamless.
If Anonymous was intellectually honest or really wanted to be truthful, s/he would have given a link or the quote upfront instead of saying “Please look for yourself instead of taking the word of a blogger…”
We hope the reader can now see how if we had fallen for this trap and published the comment and waited for the reply, it would fool many and would target especially those who find the subject complex and hard to follow.
It’s a very fine distinction of words and meaning... tricky. Fortunately, some of us are paying attention.
Perhaps the tension in this discussion might’ve been eased if attention had been given to the function /meaning of the indefinite article ‘an’ in the English language, as in ‘an alert’
DeleteFor instance [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_(grammar) ]: “An indefinite article indicates that its noun is not a particular one identifiable to the listener. It may be something that the speaker is mentioning for the first time, or the speaker may be making a general statement about any such thing.”
Anonymous14 Nov 2019, 10:17:00
DeleteReally? ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฒ
Wow! Whowould’avethought??? ๐ต๐ต๐ต๐ต๐ต
You people really never cease to amaze!!
๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
Thirteen yrs on its all the likes of frog have, its to rubbish the dogs,if they falsely alerted then ergo Madeleine was abducted,no other evidence to say so.
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/MancunianMEDlC/status/1193879539031724032
ReplyDeleteSOCIALIZED MEDICINE @MancunianMEDlC
Replying to @BourgeoisViews @scamhunter486 and 47 others
There was MM Blood found in the apartment ... In the Floor Tile & on The Window Sill ... Confirmed ... And Blood Splatter all up The Walls .... Police Evidence Photo ..
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EJGC7DiXsAAGqGP.jpg
1:13 PM - 11 Nov 2019
[Picture attached was made by us:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/10/remarkable-marksmanship.html
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-S8eKO8-PQN4/Um7EqvJOHZI/AAAAAAAAHDo/e21OELlegp4/s1600/blood+no+grid.JPG]
*****
It’s interesting to see someone who doesn’t like us to use our stuff without any acknowledgment. MancunianMEDlC wasn’t the first and certainly won’t be the last.
But that’s not important, what is important is MancunianMEDlC’s opinion that the splatter in the image is blood.
We would like to know who disagrees with this tweet about the living room areas indicating blood, or as the Frog has put it in her comment at 11 Nov 2019, 14:50:00: “What good is a VRD if it can't detect blood spray at a potential crime scene - a blood loss which can only occur whilst the heart is still pumping blood around the body?”
Also please take into account that these stains on the couch are also included as being part of that blood spray:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-A3B9Bs8AnjQ/UgtK9RW48lI/AAAAAAAAGeI/slPF1HwAG3w/s400/5A+couchl+DNA.JPG
We’re asking because we think it’s very relevant to Eddie-the-also-blood-dog debate.
Apologies to our readers as we have requested something without establishing some basic rules.
DeleteMoronic comments just stating – in whatever number of words – that “it’s not blood” will obviously not be published.
We want to know from those who say that it’s not blood, what do they think it is, taking into account what we have said in our post “DNA is… DNA”:
http://textusa.blogspot.com/2013/09/dna-is-dna.html
For example, we are curious as to what our critics will say what are stains #5 and #14.
And besides the above (stating what biological fluid other than blood the stains are) we would also like to know what our critics think Keela alerted to.
Hope now all is clear. Thank you for understanding.
If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1194858233988632577
Roger Wabbit @turaffetamer
Replying to @SteMotson
Also since you love pointing out grammar so much, what does 'one one' mean?
Also it's interesting you mention only the evrd alerts,where some alerts both dogs corroborated each other. You really are the fikest shill.
Also not so long back you didn't know Eddie alerted to blood ๐คฃ
6:02 AM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
Following the Frog’s school of “cross-trained” Eddie.
From Joseph Goebbels Wikipedia page:
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels
“If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself.
Compare sourced quote set forth above: "The English follow the principle that when one lies, it should be a big lie, and one should stick to it."
Attributed to Goebbels in Publications Relating to Various Aspects of Communism (1946), by United States Congress, House Committee on Un-American Activities. No reliable source has been located, and this is probably simply a further variation of the Big Lie idea.
Variants:
If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it.
If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.
If you repeat a lie long enough, it becomes truth.
If you repeat a lie many times, people are bound to start believing it.
Attributed in The Sack of Rome (2006) by Alexander Stille, p. 14, and also attributed in A World Without Walls: Freedom, Development, Free Trade and Global Governance (2003) by Mike Moore, p. 63.”
Has anybody found the Praia da Luz crematorium yet?
We have finally someone who has ventured what “other fluids” (Martin Grime’s words) are that Eddie may have been trained to.
ReplyDeleteTo put it in context, this venturing stemmed from this convo between the latest “Eddie-is-a-blood-dog” warrior, Snips and Whispering who is someone who openly supports the blog:
https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195082185453318167
✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16
With keela alerting - blood
Without keela alerting - cadaver
#tandem
#mccann
8:52 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1195089438885523486
Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16
Replying to @Max_____xxx
No, Eddie alerts, cadaver and only cadaver Keela alerts blood #mccann
9:21 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195089780331229187
✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16
Whenever eddie alerts independently it’s cadaver.
9:23 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1195090563911102465
Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16
Replying to @Max_____xxx
Whenever Eddie alerts, it’s cadaver. #mccann
9:26 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195090956195966982
✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16
Whenever keela alerts - blood
9:27 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1195091668929851398
Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16
Replying to @Max_____xxx
And whenever Eddie alerts it’s to cadaver. #mccann
9:30 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195091906138714123
✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm …
9:31 PM - 14 Nov 2019
(Cont)
During the convo above, AnnaEsse intervenes to help Snips:
ReplyDeletehttps://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195086690869817352
✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx 43m43 minutes ago
With keela alerting - blood
Without keela alerting - cadaver
#tandem
#mccann
8:52 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195086690869817352
AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse
Replying to @Max_____xxx @Anvil161Anvil16
Yes, if only Eddie alerted, the alert was to cadaver odour.
9:10 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1195089438885523486
Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16
Replying to @Max_____xxx
No, Eddie alerts, cadaver and only cadaver Keela alerts blood
#mccann
9:21 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195091550004502528
AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16 @Max_____xxx
If only Eddie alerted it was to cadaver odour. "Eddie' The Enhanced Victim Recovery Dog (E.V.RD.) will search for and locate human remains and body fluids including blood" A statement by Martin Grime.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_PERSONAL.htm …
9:30 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Anvil161Anvil16/status/1195092627324121104
Whispering @Anvil161Anvil16
Replying to @AnnaEsse @Max_____xxx
- yes, to human CADAVERIC blood
What ‘human fluids’ was Eddie alerted for?
9:34 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195094366106345472
AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse
Replying to @Anvil161Anvil16 @Max_____xxx
That's not what Martin said. Eddie was trained to alert to cadaverine, the organic compound released from a cadaver. If he was trained only on decomposing blood from a cadaver and Keela only to blood, if only Eddie alerted it was to cadaverine.
9:41 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195094602249883648
✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx
Replying to @AnnaEsse @Anvil161Anvil16
I think Mr Grime knows best.
9:42 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195095914697900033
AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse
Replying to @Max_____xxx @Anvil161Anvil16
Me too. Whether blood from a cadaver or fresh blood, Eddie alerted to it. Martin doesn't qualify 'body fluids,' but we can have a guess: lymph, saliva, bile, urine, cerebrospinal fluid. It would be interesting to know if trained on each fluid, a mixture or just a few.
9:47 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/Max_____xxx/status/1195096223251927041
✂️Snips ✂️ @Max_____xxx
Replying to @AnnaEsse @Anvil161Anvil16
You can research these facts online.
9:48 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
https://twitter.com/AnnaEsse/status/1195096577636913155
AnnaEsse @AnnaEsse
Replying to @Max_____xxx @Anvil161Anvil16
Yes, it's all online.
9:50 PM - 14 Nov 2019
*****
So now we have Eddie the “Jack-of-all-scents” dog. Alerts to cadaver, blood and “lymph, saliva, bile, urine, cerebrospinal fluid”.
Interesting that in all locations in which Eddie alerted and Keela didn’t (which means blood is ruled out – according to our critics because both don’t alert, according to us simply because Keela doesn’t), there was no forensics to look for “lymph, saliva, bile, urine, cerebrospinal fluid”.
Oh, and yes, it’s all online but please consult with our critics what to pick and choose that is to be read absolutely literally and withdrawn from context and what has to be interpreted in the context it’s said.
We would like to know what Snips and AnnaEsse think are the reasons why Eddie didn’t alert to any other blood in Praia da Luz other than locations/objects related to the McCanns.
And, while we’re at it, why did Eddie alert supposedly to blood in 5A in locations that one would not expect to find any blood (corner of living room behind couches, corner of living-room near closet and flowerbed) and did not give any alert to the locations we are certain there were accidental bleedings such as the kitchen and bathroom?
Or in the path between the 2 entrances, as someone who has injured him or herself outside would have to walk when walking inside to treat a wound…
Exactly.
ReplyDeleteWe, the disgusting McCann supporters are trying to show how Eddie’s alert at the Scenic PROVE that a human cadaver was inside it, while the above suspicion anti-MCann like yourself are desperately trying to cast doubt over Eddie’s alert there by dismissing it by saying it could only have been to blood from a living human being.
Continuing with the debate about whether Eddie was also a blood dog, we would like to bring to it the PJ.
ReplyDeleteThe PJ gives its opinion on the dogs before and after Martin Grime’s rogatory.
Before, it’s via the Tavares de Almeida interim report of September 2007.
We are transcribing and have translated what was said in that report about the dogs. We are doing that so the Portuguese readers and those who are fluent in Portuguese can correct our translation where we may have got it wrong.
Pages 2595 to 2600:
Portuguese: Mantendo, embora, em aberto vรกrias linhas de investigaรงรฃo foi decidido avanรงar na vertente de efectuar uma nova inspecรงรฃo ao local de onde desapareceu a menina.
English: While keeping open various lines of investigation, it was decided to move in the way of doing a new inspection where the girl disappeared.
P: A tรฉcnica de inspecรงรฃo รฉ vulgarmente usada no Reino Unido e consiste na utilizaรงรฃo de dois cรฃes especialmente treinados
E: The inspection technique is commonly used in the UK and consists in the use of two specially trained dogs.
P: Como รฉ natural o olfacto dos animais รฉ o ‘sentido’ usado. No caso deste ‘sentido’ a diferenรงa entre homem e cรฃo รฉ de 5 milhรตes de cรฉlulas para 200 milhรตes de cรฉlulas.
E: It’s natural that the smell of animals is the 'sense' used. In the case of this 'sense' the difference between man and dog is 5 million cells to 200 million cells.
P: De salientar o facto de o recurso a este tipo de inspecรงรฃo, no UK, รฉ frequente e a percentagem de รชxito รฉ de cem por cento.
E: It is noteworthy that recourse to this type of inspection is frequent in the UK and the success rate is of one hundred per cent.
P: Um dos cรฃes estรก treinado para detectar odor de cadรกver e o outro para identificar vestรญgios de sangue humano.
E: One dog is trained to detect corpse odour and the other to identify vestiges of human blood.
P: Realรงamos neste momento que a localizaรงรฃo de odores de cadรกveres significa que fisicament o corpo (cadรกver) nรฃo se encontra no local, marcado pelo cรฃo, mas seguramente ali esteve, desde que o cรฃo o sinaliza.
E: We emphasize at this point that the location of cadaver odours means that physically the body (corpse) is not in the location marked by the dog, but has certainly been there as long as the dog signals it.
P: Conforme se verifica dos respectivos autos, contantes do inquรฉrito os cรฃes efectuaram inspecรงรตes cinotรฉcnicas nos locais, abaixo, identificados e nos objectos descritos, com os resultados indicados.
E: As can be seen from the respective files, that are constant of the inquiry the dogs performed cynotechnical inspections at the places identified below and on the objects described, with the results as indicated.
P: As inspecรงรตes foram todas gravadas em som e imagem e foram dirigidas pelos colegas ingleses que acompanham os cรฃes.
E: The inspections were all recorded in sound and image and were conducted by the English colleagues accompanying the dogs.
P: Neste grande nรบmero de objectos e locais inpeccionados os cรฃes vieram a ter comportamento de identificaรงรฃo, “marcaรงรฃo”, nos seguintes locais e objectos:
E: In this large number of objects and locations inspected, the dogs came to have behaviours of identification, “marking”, in the following places and objects:
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteP: 1. apartamento 5 A, rรฉsort do Ocean Club, local de onde desapareceu a menina
1.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver
* no quarto do casal, num canto junto ao roupeiro
* na sala de estar, por detrรกs do sofรก, junto da janela lateral do apartamento
1.2 cรฃo de sangue
* na salade estar, por detrรกs do sofรก, junto da janela lateral do apartamento (exactamente o mesmo local assinalado pelo cรฃo que sinaliza odor de cadรกver);
E: 1. apartment 5 A, Ocean Club resort, place from where the girl disappeared
1.1 cadaver odour dog
* in the couple's room, in a corner next to the closet
* in the living room, behind the sofa, by the side window of the apartment
1.2 blood dog
* in the living room, behind the couch, by the side window of the apartment (exactly the same place signalled the dog that signals cadaver odour);
P: 2. zona de quintal fronteira ao apartmento 5 A:
2.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver
* num dos canteiros, sendo comentado pelo treinador a ‘ligeireza’ do odor detectado.
E: 2. backyard area bordering apartment 5 A:
2.1 cadaver odour dog
* In one of the flowerbeds, having been commented by the trainer the 'lightness' of the odour detected.
P: 3. apartamentos onde estiveram hospedados os restantes elementos do GRUPO:
* NADA foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes;
E: 3. apartments where the remaining members of the GROUP were hosted:
* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs;
P: 4. casa actual (ร data) do casal McCann;
* NADA foi detectado, na casa, por qualquer dos cรฃes.
E: 4. current house (at the time) of the McCann couple;
* NOTHING was detected in the house by any of the dogs.
P: 5. na localidade Aldeia da Luz:
* NADA foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes.
E: 5. in the village of Aldeia da Luz:
* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs.
P: 6. ร s roupas e pertences da famรญlia McCann;
6.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver:
* em duas peรงas de roupa de Kate McCann
* numa peรงa de roupa da menor Madeleine
* ao peluche da menor Madeleine
* foi detectado o odor a cadรกver, quando o peluche ainda se encontrava no interior da residรชncia (ร data da famรญlia)
* foi confirmado em condiรงรตes fora da casa;
E: 6. clothes and belongings of the McCann family;
6.1 cadaver odour dog:
* in two pieces of clothing of Kate McCann
* on a piece of clothing of the minor Madeleine
* to the stuffed toy of the minor Madeleine
* cadaver odour was detected when the stuffed toy was still inside the residence (at the time of the family)
* was confirmed in conditions outside the house;
P: 7. o veรญculo usado pela famรญlia McCann:
7.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver:
* marcou a chave do veรญculo;
* marcou no interior da bagageira do veรญculo;
7.2 cรฃo de sangue
* marcou a chave do veรญculo;
* marcou no interior da bagageira do veรญculo;
E: 7. The vehicle used by the McCann family:
7.1 cadaver odour dog:
* marked the vehicle key;
* marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle;
7.2 blood dog
* marked the vehicle key;
* marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle;
P: 8. veรญculo usado por um amigo da famรญlia, que esteve hospedado no mesmo aldeamento, coincidindo alguns dos dias:
* NADA foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes;
E: 8. vehicle used by a family friend who was staying in the same resort, coinciding some of the days:
* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs;
P: 9. todos os veรญculos usados pelo arguido Robert Murat e pessoas que lhe estรฃo prรณximas:
* NADA foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes.
E: 9. all vehicles used by the arguido Robert Murat and people close to him:
* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs.
P: (num total de dez veรญculos o cรฃo de odor a cadรกver e o de odor de sangue apenas fizeram marcaรงรฃo no veรญculo da famรญlia Mccann, alugado a 27 de Maio!!!)
E: (out of a total of ten vehicles the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour one only marked the Mccann family vehicle, rented on May 27 !!!)
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteP: Os locais e peรงas marcados e sinalizados pelo cรฃo de sangue encontram-se a ser sujeitas ร realizaรงรฃo de exames, parte dos quais se encontram concluรญdos.
E: The locations and objects marked and signalled by the blood dog are undergoing exams, some of which are concluded.
P: Nรฃo menos relevante se torna o apuramento dos resultados que apontam ADN da Madaleine como presente no local do apartamento 5 A, por detrรกs do sofรก, local marcado pelo cรฃo de sangue. Em todos os locais marcados pelo cรฃo de sangue o laboratรณrio veio a confirmar existir ADN.
E: No less relevant becomes the determination of results that point to Madeleine’s DNA as present at the location of apartment 5 A, behind the couch, location marked by the blood dog. At all sites marked by the blood dog the laboratory has confirmed the existence of DNA.
(…)
P: Quando a comunicaรงรฃo social informou que tinha sido ‘detectado sangue no carro e no apartmento’ a Kate e membros da famรญlia vieram a pรบblico com a desculpa simples de ter sido alguรฉm, com acesso ao apartmento, a colocar as provas.
E: When the media reported that 'blood was detected in the car and apartment', Kate and members of the family went publicly with the simple excuse that someone with access to the apartment was placing the evidence.
P: Agora admitem mesmo ter sido รณrgรฃo de investigaรงรฃo criminal a colocar provas ‘falsas’ (sangue e odor de cadรกver no apartmento e veรญculo)
E: Now they even admit having been the criminal investigative body to place 'false' evidence (blood and cadaver odour in the apartment and vehicle)
P: A Kate, na tentativa de justificaรงรฃo de sangue terรก ido mais longe, informando, nessa ocasiรฃo que, a Madeleine tinha, por vezes, hemorragias nasais.
E: Kate, in an attempt to justify blood, would have gone further, reporting on that occasion that Madeleine sometimes had nosebleeds.
(…)
P: Verifica-se coincidรชncia entre a inalizaรงรฃo de odor a cadรกver e sangue conforme o Relatรณrio Laboratorial (parcial) jรก junto aos Autos.
E: There is a coincidence between the signalling of the cadaver odour and blood according to the (partial) Laboratory Report already in the file.
P: Tal sinalizaรงรฃo, ocorreu por detrรกs do sofรก da sala (odor de cadรกver / sangue / ADN) e que indubitavelment prova que tal mรณvel foi obviamente encostado por alguรฉm, apรณs a verificaรงรฃo da morte de Madeleine McCann. Face aos pouco indรญcios recolhidos no local e sujeitos a exame, รฉ de admitir a forte hipรณtese de ter o mesmo sido sujeito a “lavagem” no momento seguinte ร ocorrรชncia da morte;
E: Such signalling occurred behind the living room couch (corpse / blood / DNA odour) and it undoubtedly proves that such piece of furniture was obviously moved against the wall by someone after the verification of the death of Madeleine McCann. Given the little evidence collected on the spot and subject to examination, it is to admit the strong possibility of it having been subjected to “washing” in the moment following the occurrence of death;
P: De igual modo, o peluche utilizado pela menina morta, encontrado ร cabeceira da cama onde normalmente dormia (vide fotos de inspecรงรฃo inicial) revela que alguรฉm ali colocou em momento posterior ร morte, uma vez que a prรณpria cama nada tem de odor a cadรกver. Isto รฉ, ocorreu uma modificaรงรฃo intencional, no sentido de simular um quadro nรฃo correspondente ร realidade, numa tentativa de aproveitamento para a simulaรงรฃo de quadro de rapto;
E: Similarly, the stuffed toy used by the dead girl, found at the head of the bed where she normally slept (see photos of initial inspection) reveals that someone put it there in a moment after the death, since the bed itself in nothing has cadaver odour. That is, there was an intentional modification in order to simulate a picture that doesn’t correspond to reality, in an attempt to exploit the simulation of the abduction framework;
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteP: Acrescenta-se ainda que o cรฃo de odor a cadรกver sinalizou fortemente o quarto onde o casal Mccann dormia, o que pode indicar a deslocaรงรฃo do corpo do local da morte (sala de estar), para zona nรฃo vรญsivel em tal quarto;
E: One should add that cadaver odour dog signalled strongly the room where the Mccann couple slept, which may indicate the displacement of the body from the place of death (living room) to an unseen area in said room;
P: Acresce que uma nova forte marcaรงรฃo de odor de cadรกver fori efectuada em roupas de Kate McCann, o que pode indiciar que a mesma esteve em contacto com o cadรกver.
E: In addition, a strong new marking of cadaver odour was made on Kate McCann's clothing, which may indict that she was in contact with the corpse.
P: Igualmente existe forte marcaรงรฃo de odor de cadรกver no carro utilizado pelo casal McCann (desde 27 de Maio de 2007), o que conjugado com a marcaรงรฃo de cรฃo de sangue e fundamentado em analรญses laboratoriais, constantes nos Autos que indicam a presenรงa de ADN da menor Madeleine McCann na bagageira da viatura, sรฃo de forma a nรฃo excluir a forte hipรณtese que esta viatura possa ter sido utilizada para um eventual translado do cadรกver, apรณs 24 dias da ocorrรชncia da morte.
E: There is equally a strong marking of cadaver odour on the car used by the McCann couple (since May 27, 2007), which in conjunction with the marking of the blood dog and based on laboratory analysis contained in the file that indicate the presence of DNA of the minor Madeleine McCann in the boot of the vehicle, are so as not to exclude the strong hypothesis that this vehicle may have been used for a possible transfer of the body, 24 days after the occurrence of the death.
P: Nรฃo รฉ de desprezar a indicaรงรฃo do cรฃo de odor de cadรกver, bem como do cรฃo de sangue, na chave do veรญculo atrรกs referido, vindo o laboratรณrio a confirmar a existรชncia de ADN de Gerald McCann. Acrescenta-se que esta รบltima sinalizaรงรฃo foi conseguida apรณs a chave ter sido colocada longe do veรญculo e em local nรฃo visรญvel.
E: It is not to be disregarded the indication of the cadaver dog, as well as the blood dog, on the vehicle key mentioned before, having the laboratory come to confirm the existence of Gerald McCann's DNA. In addition, this signalling was achieved after the key was placed away from the vehicle and in place that was not visible.
*****
This report was in September, about a month after the canine diligences took place.
There is not a minimal hint or implication that Eddie is a blood dog. In fact, the report makes it perfectly clear that the 2 dogs have distinct skillsets and missions:
“One dog is trained to detect corpse odour and the other to identify vestiges of human blood.”
It does not say anywhere, that Keela corroborates Eddie’s alerts. Eddie alerts to cadaver scent and Keela to blood scent.
Throughout the report Eddie is referred to as the “cadaver odour dog” and Keela as the “blood dog”.
No mention whatsoever of Eddie being a possible cross-trained dog. Nor even a hint of that possibility.
We imagine that when this report was written up, due to the importance and international visibility of the case, it was done in a close coordination between the PJ and Martin Grime.
That means that if any of Eddie’s alerts to locations/objects also alerted to by Keela could be just tha of blood, that would have to have been mentioned to the PJ in this report. It is not.
At the moment when the ENTIRE world was focused on Portugal and on this case in particular, was the PJ wrong about Eddie?
The only other explanation other than Eddie NOT being a blood dog, would be for at this point time Martin Grime be withholding this crucial piece of information from the PJ.
And then there’s this: “There is equally a strong marking of cadaver odour on the car used by the McCann couple (since May 27, 2007), which in conjunction with the marking of the blood dog…”
https://mobile.twitter.com/McCannCaseTweet/status/1194120779283042304
ReplyDeleteMcF seems to be agreeing that there was an alert to cadaver odour in the car. No suggestion it could be blood.
Why can’t these people adopt a consistent position and decide which side of the fence to come down on?
McF used to say neglect was the Mcs alibi, then changed her tune.
Meant to say in comment it could be blood ONLY.
DeleteAs we said in our comment at 15 Nov 2019, 21:32:00, the PJ gives its opinion about the dogs in 2 separate occasions.
ReplyDeleteThe first, which we have transcribed and translated in that comment was via Tavares de Almeida in the interim report. This report was written before Martin Grime’s rogatory.
The second time the PJ gives its opinion on the dogs is in the final report. Obviously after Martin Grime’s rogatory, which, obviously again, is in the files which are attached to this final report.
We have done with the final report the same that we did with the interim one, which was to transcribe the Portuguese and follow it with our translation:
PORTUGUESE:
Serรก agora abordada a questรฃo relativa ร actuaรงรฃo dos canรญdeos britรขnicos e consequente qualidade assumida pelos pais de MADELEINE, mais uma vez sem prejuรญzo de retomar a restante descriรงรฃo mais adiante.
OUR TRANSLATION:
It will now be addressed the issue of the performance of British canids and the consequent quality of assumed by MADELEINE's parents, once again without hindering the retaking of the rest of the description ahead.
PORTUGUESE:
Deste modo, a fls. 1989 e seguintes, poder-se-รก ler um relatรณrio elaborado por MARK HARRISON, cuja especialidade รฉ a busca de pessoas, desaparecidas ou vรญtimas de homicรญdio, inclusive em cenรกrios de catรกstrofe. Alertou para a utillizaรงao de valรชncias caninas, especializados em detecรงรฃo de vestรญgios hemรกticos humanos e odor cadavรฉrico, tambรฉm humano.
OUR TRANSLATION:
Thus, pgs. 1989 et seq., it can be read a report by MARK HARRISON, whose speciality is the search for people, missing or victims of homicide, including in disaster scenarios. He alerted to the use of canine valences, specialized in the detection of human hematic vestiges and cadaveric odour, also human.
PORTUGUESE:
Trata-se de uma tรฉcnica de inspecรงรฃo vulgarmente usada no Reino Unido, frequentemente com resultados positivos consistindo na utilizaรงao de dois cรฃes especialmente treinados.
OUR TRANSLATION:
It’s a commonly used inspection technique in the United Kingdom, often with positive results consisting of the use of two specially trained dogs.
PORTUGUESE:
Um dos cรฃes estรก treinado para detectar odor de cadรกver e o outro, para identificar vestรญgios de sangue humano, havendo conhecimento que a sua utilizaรงao anterior proporcionara resultados significativos, nomeadamente na detecรงรฃo de tais vestรญgios, os quais haviam sido, apรณs, confirmados laboratorialmente.
OUR TRANSLATION:
One of the dogs is trained to detect cadaver odour and the other to identify vestiges of human blood, knowing that their previous use has provided significant results, namely in detecting such vestiges, which were later confirmed in a laboratory.
PORTUGUESE:
Apรณs consulta e obtencรฃo de parecer positivo junto da policia britรขnica, optou-se por recorrer a esta valรชncia, foram examinados um grande nรบmero de objectos e locais, tendo tais diligรชncias sido reportadas atravรฉs de filmagens que se encontram juntas aos autos.
OUR TRANSLATION:
After consultation and obtaining a positive feedback from the British police, it was decided to resort to this valence, a large number of objects and locations were examined, having such diligences being reported through filming that are attached to the file.
PORTUGUESE:
A visualizaรงรฃo de tais filmagens afigura-se essencial para compreender, mais do que quaiquer palavras, a actuaรงรฃo e a sinalizaรงรฃo dos canรญdeos (v. suportes digitais constantes do Apenso III).
OUR TRANSLATION:
Viewing such footage appears to be essential to the understanding, more than any words, of the performance and signalling of canids (see digital media in Apenso III).
PORTUGUESE:
Nalguns desses locais e objectos, os animais vieram a ter comportamento de identificaรงรฃo e sinalizaรงรฃo, a saber:
OUR TRANSLATION:
In some of these locations and objects, the animals came to have an identification and signalling behaviour, to be known:
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeletePORTUGUESE:
1. Apartamento 5 A, rรฉsort do “Ocean Club”, local de onde desapareceu a crianรงa
1.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver
* no quarto do casal, num canto junto do roupeiro
* na sala de estar, por detrรกs do sofรก, junto da janela lateral do apartamento
1.2 cรฃo de sangue
* na salade estar, por detrรกs do sofรก, junto da janela lateral do apartamento (exactamente o mesmo local assinalado pelo cรฃo que sinaliza odor de cadรกver);
OUR TRANSLATION:
1. Apartment 5 A, Ocean Club resort, place from where the child disappeared
1.1 cadaver odour dog
* in the couple's room, in a corner next to the closet
* in the living room, behind the sofa, by the side window of the apartment
1.2 blood dog
* in the living room, behind the couch, by the side window of the apartment (exactly the same place signalled the dog that signals cadaver odour);
PORTUGUESE:
2. Zona de quintal, fronteira ao apartmento 5 A:
2.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver
* num dos canteiros, sendo comentado pelo tratador a ligeireza do odor detectado.
OUR TRANSLATION:
2. Backyard area, bordering apartment 5 A:
2.1 cadaver odour dog
* In one of the flowerbeds, having been commented by the handler the lightness of the odour detected.
PORTUGUESE:
3. Apartamentos onde estiveram hospedados os restantes elementos do grupo:
* nada foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes;
OUR TRANSLATION:
3. Apartments where the remaining members of the group were hosted:
* nothing was detected by any of the dogs;
PORTUGUESE:
4. Habitaรงรฃo, ร data da inspecรงรฃo do casal McCANN;
* nada foi detectado, na casa, por qualquer dos cรฃes.
OUR TRANSLATION:
4. Residence, at the time of the inspection, of the McCANN couple;
* nothing was detected in the house by any of the dogs.
PORTUGUESE:
5. Na localidade Aldeia da Luz:
* nada foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes.
OUR TRANSLATION:
5. In the village of Aldeia da Luz:
* nothing was detected by any of the dogs.
PORTUGUESE:
6. Na roupas e pertences da famรญlia McCANN;
6.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver:
* em duas peรงas de roupa de KATE HEALY
* numa peรงa de roupa da menor MADELEINE
* possivelmente, no peluche da menor MADELEINE (foi detectado o odor a cadรกver, quando o peluche ainda se encontrava no interior da residรชncia (ร data ocupada pela famรญlia)
* foi confirmado a sinalizaรงรฃo em cenรกrio exterior da casa;
OUR TRANSLATION:
6. In the clothes and belongings of the McCANN family;
6.1 cadaver odour dog:
* in two pieces of clothing of KATE HEALY;
* on a piece of clothing of the minor MADELEINE
* to the stuffed toy of the minor MADELEINE (cadaver odour was detected when the stuffed toy was still inside the residence (at the time occupied by the family)
* the signalling was confirmed in a scenario in the exterior of the house;
PORTUGUESE:
7. No veรญculo usado pela famรญlia McCANN:
7.1 cรฃo de odor a cadรกver:
* marcou a chave do veรญculo;
7.2 cรฃo de sangue
* marcou a chave do veรญculo;
* marcou no interior da bagageira do veรญculo;
OUR TRANSLATION:
7. In the vehicle used by the McCANN family:
7.1 cadaver odour dog:
* marked the vehicle key;
7.2 blood dog
* marked the vehicle key;
* marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle;
PORTUGUESE:
8. No veรญculo usado por um amigo da famรญlia, que esteve hospedado no mesmo aldeamento, coincidindo alguns dos dias:
* nada foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes;
OUR TRANSLATION:
8. In the vehicle used by a family friend who was staying in the same resort, coinciding some of the days:
* nothing was detected by any of the dogs;
PORTUGUESE:
9. Em todos os veรญculos usados pelo arguido ROBERT MURAT e pessoas que lhe estรฃo prรณximas:
* nada foi detectado por qualquer dos cรฃes.
OUR TRANSLATION:
9. In all vehicles used by the arguido ROBERT MURAT and people close to him:
* nothing was detected by any of the dogs.
PORTUGUESE:
(num total de dez veรญculos, o cรฃo de odor de cadรกver e de odor de sangue, apenas fizeram sinalizaรงao no veiculo da famรญlia McCANN, alugado a 27 de Maio)
OUR TRANSLATION:
(out of a total of ten vehicles, the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour one only made a signalling on the McCANN family vehicle rented on 27 May)
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeletePORTUGUESE:
Nos locais e peรงas marcados e sinalizados pelo cรฃo de sangue, foram realizados exames periciais, especialmente num credenciado laboratรณrio britรขnico (Forensic Science Service - v. Apensos I e VII — Relatรณrio final dos FSS) mas, tambรฉm, alguns deles, no (v. Apenso I), cujos resultados finais nรฃo vieram corroborar as marcaรงรตes caninas, ou seja, foi recolhido material celular, que, todavia, nรฃo foi identificado como pertencente a alguรฉm em concreto, nรฃo tendo sido possivel apurar a qualidade desse material (v.g. se poderia ser sangue ou outro tipo de fluido corporal).
OUR TRANSLATION:
At the locations and pieces marked and signalled by the blood dog, expert examinations were carried out, especially in an accredited British laboratory (Forensic Science Service - see Apensos I and VII - Final Report of the FSS) but, also, some of them at the Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal (see Apenso I), whose final results did not corroborate the canine markings, that is, cellular material was collected, which, however, was not identified as belonging to someone in concrete, and it was not possible to ascertain the quality of that material. (e.g. if it could be blood or other body fluid).
PORTUGUESE:
Todavia, numa primeira abordagem cientรญfica (fls. 2617 e s.s.), afigurou-se a possibilidade de compatibilizaรงรฃo do perfil de ADN da MADELEINE com alguns dos vestรญgios recolhidos (dos quais avultavam os existentes na viatura Renault Scenic alugada pelo casal McCANN), compatibilizaรงรฃo essa, como se constata pelo supra mencionado relatรณrio final dos FSS, que nรฃo se veio — apรณs a realizaรงao de longos e complexos exames – a verificar.
OUR TRANSLATION:
However, in a first scientific approach (pages 2617 et seq.), there appeared to be the possibility of a match between the DNA profile of MADELEINE with some of the collected vestiges (of which largely were from the Renault Scenic vehicle rented by the McCANN couple), a match which, as can be seen in the above-mentioned FSS final report, did not come – after long and complex examinations – to be verified.
PORTUGUESE:
A fls. 2461 e s.s., procedeu-se ร junรงรฃo da traduรงรฃo dos comentรกrios efectuados pelo tratador cinรณfilo, aquando dos actos inspectivos.
OUR TRANSLATION:
At pgs. 2461 et seq., it was appended the translation of the comments made by the cynophile handler, during the inspective acts.
PORTUGUESE:
Com base na actuaรงรฃo da equipa cinotรฉcnica e da supra referida primeira abordagem cientรญfica, indiciadoras da eventualidade de existรชncia de cadรกver no apartamento e na viatura utilizada pela famรญlia MCCANN, e a fim de permitir que GERALD McCANN e KATE HEALY pudessem ver salvaguardada a sua posiรงรฃo processual, os mesmos, ao abrigo das disposiรงรตes processuais penais entรฃo vigentes, vieram a ser constituรญdos arguidos, face ร mera possibilidade do seu envolvimento com o eventual cadรกver. No decurso do interrogatรณrio como arguidos, alijaram qualquer responsabilidade no desaparecimento da filha.
OUR TRANSLATION:
E: Based on the action of the cynotechnic team and the abovementioned first scientific approach, indicating the existence of a cadaver in the apartment and the car used by the McCANN family, and in order to allow GERALD McCANN and KATE HEALY to have safeguarded their procedural positions, they, under the then existing criminal procedural provisions, were made arguidos in view of the mere possibility of their involvement with the possible cadaver. In the course of their interrogation as defendants, they have been held responsible for the disappearance of their daughter.
*****
Both reports detail the alerts. It’s interesting to compare what is said in the Interim report (before Grime’s rogatory) with what is said in the final one (after Grime’s rogatory):
(Cont)
(Cont)
ReplyDeleteINTERIM REPORT:
1. apartment 5 A, Ocean Club resort, place from where the girl disappeared
1.1 cadaver odour dog
* in the couple's room, in a corner next to the closet
* in the living room, behind the sofa, by the side window of the apartment
1.2 blood dog
* in the living room, behind the couch, by the side window of the apartment (exactly the same place signalled the dog that signals cadaver odour);
FINAL REPORT:
1. Apartment 5 A, Ocean Club resort, place from where the child disappeared
1.1 cadaver odour dog
* in the couple's room, in a corner next to the closet
* in the living room, behind the sofa, by the side window of the apartment
1.2 blood dog
* in the living room, behind the couch, by the side window of the apartment (exactly the same place signalled the dog that signals cadaver odour);
*****
INTERIM REPORT:
2. backyard area bordering apartment 5 A:
2.1 cadaver odour dog
* In one of the flowerbeds, having been commented by the trainer the 'lightness' of the odour detected.
FINAL REPORT:
2. Backyard area, bordering apartment 5 A:
2.1 cadaver odour dog
* In one of the flowerbeds, having been commented by the handler the lightness of the odour detected.
*****
INTERIM REPORT:
3. apartments where the remaining members of the GROUP were hosted:
* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs;
FINAL REPORT:
3. Apartments where the remaining members of the group were hosted:
* nothing was detected by any of the dogs;
*****
INTERIM REPORT:
4. current house (at the time) of the McCann couple;
* NOTHING was detected in the house by any of the dogs.
FINAL REPORT:
4. Residence, at the time of the inspection, of the McCANN couple;
* nothing was detected in the house by any of the dogs.
*****
INTERIM REPORT:
5. in the village of Aldeia da Luz:
* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs.
FINAL REPORT:
5. In the village of Aldeia da Luz:
* nothing was detected by any of the dogs.
*****
INTERIM REPORT:
6. clothes and belongings of the McCann family;
6.1 cadaver odour dog:
* in two pieces of clothing of Kate McCann
* on a piece of clothing of the minor Madeleine
* to the stuffed toy of the minor Madeleine
* cadaver odour was detected when the stuffed toy was still inside the residence (at the time of the family)
* was confirmed in conditions outside the house;
FINAL REPORT:
6. In the clothes and belongings of the McCANN family;
6.1 cadaver odour dog:
* in two pieces of clothing of KATE HEALY;
* on a piece of clothing of the minor MADELEINE
* possibly, to the stuffed toy of the minor MADELEINE (cadaver odour was detected when the stuffed toy was still inside the residence (at the time occupied by the family)
* the signalling was confirmed in a scenario in the exterior of the house;
*****
INTERIM REPORT:
7. The vehicle used by the McCann family:
7.1 cadaver odour dog:
* marked the vehicle key;
* marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle;
7.2 blood dog
* marked the vehicle key;
* marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle;
FINAL REPORT:
7. In the vehicle used by the McCANN family:
7.1 cadaver odour dog:
* marked the vehicle key;
7.2 blood dog
* marked the vehicle key;
* marked inside the boot compartment of the vehicle;
*****
INTERIM REPORT:
8. vehicle used by a family friend who was staying in the same resort, coinciding some of the days:
* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs;
FINAL REPORT:
8. In the vehicle used by a family friend who was staying in the same resort, coinciding some of the days:
* nothing was detected by any of the dogs;
*****
INTERIM REPORT:
9. all vehicles used by the arguido Robert Murat and people close to him:
* NOTHING was detected by any of the dogs.
FINAL REPORT:
9. In all vehicles used by the arguido ROBERT MURAT and people close to him:
* nothing was detected by any of the dogs.
(Cont)
Cont)
ReplyDeleteINTERIM REPORT:
(out of a total of ten vehicles the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour one only marked the Mccann family vehicle, rented on May 27 !!!)
FINAL REPORT:
(out of a total of ten vehicles, the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour one only made a signalling on the McCANN family vehicle rented on 27 May)
*****
As can be seen, the text was clearly revised and it did include some relevant changes: the alert that did not exist by Eddie inside the boot of the Scenic was removed, the wording of the alert to the cuddle-cat was changed and the word “possibly” was added, the ‘lightness’ of the alert on the flowerbed became lightness and the 3 exclamation marks about the cadaver odour dog and the blood odour only signalling the Scenic were removed.
The text was clearly revised, but there is not a minimal hint or implication that Eddie is a blood dog. In fact, the report makes it perfectly clear that the 2 dogs have distinct skillsets and missions:
“One of the dogs is trained to detect cadaver odour and the other to identify vestiges of human blood”
Like in the Interim report it does not say anywhere, that Keela corroborates Eddie’s alerts. Eddie alerts to cadaver scent and Keela to blood scent.
Throughout the final report Eddie is referred to as the “cadaver odour dog” and Keela as the “blood dog”.
No mention whatsoever of Eddie being a possible cross-trained dog. Nor even a hint of that possibility.
Nor a hint of the possibility that any of Eddie’s alerts to locations/objects also alerted to by Keela could be just that of blood, and we are certain that if that was the case, it would have to be mentioned, without any doubt.
So, AFTER Martin Grime’s words in the translated rogatory, the PJ CLEARLY maintains its opinion that Eddie is ONLY a cadaver dog.
No genuine McCann troll would speak about @LoverandomIeigh in such a dirty, misogynistic manner, so is Zora McCartney telling the truth about @TrollbusterXXX being Ben Thompson? It would explain why @TrollBusterXXX is lying about Ponce being Francis Dunn or Rebecca Dunn, and why Erica Jane and Jules have no problem chatting with him.
ReplyDelete���������������� Rebecca ©️����
@LoverandomIeigh
·
3h
https://mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/katie-hopkins-forced-sell-1m-20899416?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=mirror_main
My heart bleeds for her...NOT ! Trollumist!
Another haggard anti #McCann female. All that hatred taken it toll.
Katie Hopkins forced to sell £1m home and and now rents after cringe libel loss
Racist Katie Hopkins moaned that speaking her mind lost her her career after she lost a £500,000 legal case to the writer Jack Monroe
mirror.co.uk
Belfast Banshee
@ericajane1980
·
3h
Wow such bitterness and nastiness from such an old lady, little wonder Isabelles acupuncturist made that remark about your wrinkle creased mouth, happy Sunday Sunbeam #McCann troll venting her true colours
Steven Hamilton
@TrollBusterXXX
Replying to
@ericajane1980
and
@LoverandomIeigh
Could the acupuncturist find a spot where a prick hadn’t been?
12:00 PM · Nov 17, 2019·Twitter for iPhone
Belfast Banshee
@ericajane1980
·
3h
Replying to
@TrollBusterXXX
and
@LoverandomIeigh
With your mate Rebecca and 5 being the magic number I doubt not lol
Oh so now the PJ know better than Martin Grime, despite them having NEVER used dogs like Eddie or Keela prior to the Madeleine McCann case. Priceless!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 17 Nov 2019, 15:45:00,
DeleteSpeaking of priceless, your comment is truly a Mona Lisa of comments.
True, the PJ didn’t have experience of these dogs, and having come from the UK, it would be really odd if they did.
But they did have someone at their disposal who did have that experience: Martin Grime.
He was the subject matter expert but he worked for an investigative body in that particular investigation, which was the PJ.
Are you suggesting that the PJ decided for themselves, without asking Martin Grime exactly what each dog alerted to, what each alert meant, and just wrote whatever it came to their mind about the dogs?
That’s why they posed the questions for Grime to answer in his rogatory interview, which didn’t subsequently alter the conclusions of the interim report.
Exactly the point - because they lacked experience but accompanied Grime on his inspections, they would surely have asked him what conclusions he reached after his dogs alerted and what they could rely on their alerts – Eddie as a cadaver dog and Keela as a blood one – to build the case against the McCann.
Your comment calls into question the professionalism and intelligence of all the PJ officers accompanying Martin Grime and the professionalism and intelligence of Martin Grime who, according to you on seeing the alerts of his dog Eddie being distorted into being uniquely a cadaver dog, just watched passively.
Did Grime warn the PJ that Eddie’s alerts behind the sofa and to the seal of the car door could be alerts to the blood of a LIVING person?
Did Paiva and other PJ officers disregard his warning?
Did Grime fail to warn the PJ of any provisos relating to the alerts?
Or, as we say, was there no need to give any warnings or provisos?
Grime warned the PJ, repeatedly, that no evidential reliance could be placed on any alert unless confirmed in the lab. Is it starting to sink in why that is? Because there is more than one interpretation, however desperate you are to convince people otherwise. Evidence has to be scrupulous and it has to be fair, otherwise false convictions can happen.
DeleteAnonymous 17 Nov 2019, 19:16:00,
DeleteCould you please provide Martin Grime's qualifications in law, and in Portuguese law in particular?
While you're at it, could you please say in which courts of law he presided, where he as the presiding judge made similar decisions?
As far as we know, only judges can determine what is and what isn't admissible in court.
You can't possibly be that dense.
DeleteIf the dog alerts, but there is no lab confirmation, who is going to give evidence - the dog? No, the handler. And the handler stated that no evidential conclusion could be drawn from an unconfirmed alert. Do you think any prosecutor would put that to a jury? It seems you believe Grime only when it suits your narrative to do so.
Anonymous 17 Nov 2019, 22:19:00,
DeleteWe’ll start with your personal insult. We inform you that we have accepted it as evidence in the court of public opinion, as proof of admissibility on your part as having lost the argument.
Where did you get the “who is going to give evidence - the dog?” from? From the Clement Freud school of arguments to defend the McCanns? It sure looks like that way. And you do realise that when he used it, it sounded as pathetic as you are sounding now.
And one would even think that you were Turafftamer who is still trying to sell tickets for last week’s game:
https://twitter.com/turaffetamer/status/1196192648354242562
Woger Wabbit @turaffetamer
Replying to @SteMotson
You thick tnuc.
Again please do explain a false properly. Not a false alert.
Dogs only alert to what they are trained to alert to and the SCENT OF CADAVAR CAN ONLY BE CORROBORATED BY BODY OR BODY PARTS. Eddie also alerted to blood and so some alerts were corroborated by keela
10:25 PM - 17 Nov 2019
The handler, in this case Martin Grime, states what falls within his area of expertise. What he cannot do is to determine what other experts, in this case in particular the courts of law, will decide.
What Grime said, and evidently you are twisting to fit your narrative, is that no evidential conclusion from a cadaver alert can be drawn to identify a body without forensic confirmation and that his is opinion.
Now, what he didn’t say is that no evidential conclusion can be drawn from a canine cadaver alert to determine that a body was present. That conclusion can be taken and WAS taken by the Portuguese justice system. If you have any questions please address them to your friend JBLittlemore who we have educated twice, if memory doesn’t fail us, on the subject and of course you are free to say as he did that you don’t care what the PT courts say.
This means that PT courts took as evidential conclusion that Eddie alerted to a cadaver both in the apartment and the Scenic, and that PROVEN FACT was uncontested by the McCanns. What the Portuguese didn’t do, was to take the alert as the evidential conclusion that it was Maddie, due to the lack of forensic corroboration.
Evidential conclusion from the forensically uncorroborated canine cadaver alert: PROVEN that there had been a cadaver in the Scenic and in the apartment; NOT PROVEN that is was Maddie.
So much for Turaffetamer’s “SCENT OF CADAVAR CAN ONLY BE CORROBORATED BY BODY OR BODY PARTS”, he’s as right about this as he is about Praia da Luz having a crematorium in the church.
About forensically uncorroborated canine cadaver alerts not being admissible as evidential evidence, we would say that recent court cases are proving Martin Grime’s assessment wrong, as cadaver dog evidence is being admitted.
We believe that Martin Grime spoke out of his experience and his intention was to be helpful (basically saying, according to my experience please take into account that you need more than Eddie alerting to constitute proof that it is Maddie) but is not a legal expert.
In fact, due to the circumstantial evidence surrounding the alert, the Portuguese justice system could have decided to prosecute the McCanns just with the evidence that is on the files. It didn’t decide that way and we fully respect that decision, but we are highlighting that it was a subjective decision by someone with the appropriate legitimacy and qualification and who could have decided differently if they thought that the existing evidence would be enough to prosecute as the FSS did not clearly state that it was NOT Maddie.
The decision of what is admissible as evidence lies solely with the legal decider and not with the dog handler however much experience he may have.
The bit that you apparently can't get your head around even after all this time is that an alert to cadaver odour in the car still would not be proof that Madeleine had been transported in it. McCann family belongings were moved on it, some of which went on to give a positive alert.
ReplyDeleteYour attempts to rewrite history to your own interpretation, despite the testimony of Martin Grime, are just woeful.
Anonymous 17 Nov 2019, 17:39:00,
DeleteSo now it's even if it is cadaver odour in the Scenic?
Where's your certainty that Eddie is also a blood dog gone?
If clothes caused the cadaver odour, what did Keela alert to in the boot of the car? Hardly likely the Mcs transported bloody clothing that left a deposit. Anything that incriminating would have been disposed of at the outset.
DeleteCadaver scent comes from dead people not living and even if we were to stretch it to just being Maddies blood innocent parents would be beside themselves at the thought of their child being injured or even dead. None of this fits within the fairy tale of them stating in regular interviews they believed no harm had come to her, this theory simply doesn't wash as fear of the unknown where their child is concerned not only can drive them to drink but mentally break down. They've never once shown any real fear about their child being hurt or in danger and that is why they are despised so much.
DeleteSo they ignored Martin Grime's words then? How very lax of your fellow countrymen. Still, not surprising, you do the same. Ignore the expert, and make it up as you go along. By the way, did it take you long to write all that? Nothing better to do? Nope? Thought not. When can we expect part 8 of you trying and failing to ever so desperately convince people of this lie that you've devoted so much of your life to? Will it be a very long and boring piece like everything else you ever wrote? I do hope so.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 17 Nov 2019, 18:02:00,
DeleteYou are forgetting that Martin Grime watched the laxity of the fellow countrymen and has recently forgot to mention the possibility that Eddie's alert in the Scenic could only be blood in the recent Netflix documentary...
By the way, nice xenophobic remarks from someone who is supposedly supporting the PJ investigation...
Now insulting the Portuguese police again.
ReplyDeleteOf course they would be aware the alerts needed to be confirmed by forensic testing, as samples were collected by the PJ under the supervision of a U.K. scientific adviser, Jonathan Smith.
It’s something about that car being used to transport a body which is causing concern to someone other than just the McCanns. Someone who is willing to concede there was cadaver odour in the car, but caused by contaminated clothing, not a body. Someone who accepts M died and that the McCann’s transported her clothing in the car, because it’s less damaging to than allowing for her body to have been transported in the car, for this person.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/115/9news_25_04_2017.htm
ReplyDeleteInteresting article re Sandy Cameron.
I don’t think this interview was included in Mark Saunokonoko’s broadcasts.
Here Mark S refers to cadaver and blood dogs. No ref to Eddie being blood dog.