Controversial - Madeline McCann

[TriChick]

Interesting point of view regarding the use of cadaver dogs in the case
https: //madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39078055/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%2031

 

[sue_88]

Cadaver Dog study, concluding a near 100% accuracy of a well trained dog.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037907380700134X

 

[Larkspur]

Cadaver Dog study, concluding a near 100% accuracy of a well trained dog.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037907380700134X

I guess that raises the question "Was / were the dog/s used well-trained?" To be fair, I'm not sure that a study of three dogs in Hamburg really tells us anything conclusive about the accuracy of any other dog anywhere else.

 

[sue_88]

Cadaver Dog study, concluding a near 100% accuracy of a well trained dog.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037907380700134X

I guess that raises the question "Was / were the dog/s used well-trained?" To be fair, I'm not sure that a study of three dogs in Hamburg really tells us anything conclusive about the accuracy of any other dog anywhere else.

I appreciate these dogs weren't the dogs used, but show that they are accurate when trained well.

And yes, Keela, the human blood dog, is one of the best dogs used around that time and was involved in murder cases all over the world including UK and USA. Sniffed minute blood on weapons which lead to apprehending a murderer. Along with Eddie, cadaver dog, who has successfully found murdered bodies.

From reading I would say these are two very well trained dogs, and therefore reference article for the accuracy of a trained dog.

 

[Tasha]

Sorry Tiff I've hardly been around, will just go find them.

The dogs were on more money that the chief in their constabulary, that is how highly regarded they were.

 

[Tasha]

I really need to explain that better. The dogs were hired by other police forces and what they charged others to use them was the equivalent of more than the chief of their police force. Yeah that makes more sense

 

[baby D]

Thanks Tasha --- I have started to read through some of the information. The emails that show apparent 'sightings' of Maddie give me the chills -- even the ones that say she is safe. Do you think they were all followed up as potential leads?

The photos showing just how many places they found blood splattering in their apartment --- just -----

The DNA parts confused me -- so 15 out of 19 components matched to components found in Maddie's DNA make up? Is that right? Also another part said it was 15 out of 39 I think. Surely. if it were her, it would be a complete match? Sorry - just trying to get my head around the science---

 

[Tasha]

I am not sure if they were all followed up. It does say further on I think.

I cant look at the photos

It is 15 out of 19, the 39 was probably a typo.


I asked on a group I am on, because I don't know the answer and someone replied that the other four components were degenerated. (Obviously need to take it with a pinch of salt as it isn't fact but I will have a look about).

 

[cat lover]

I feel so so sorry for them and they must feel such guilt but i do feel their parenting was not up to par doing what they did if im honest

 

[Foogirl]

Interesting point of view regarding the use of cadaver dogs in the case
https: //madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39078055/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%2031

This is a good explanation of the use of dogs, backed up by information from the officers who use them.

A cadaver dog indicating a scent does not mean there is or has been a dead body in the area. Of course, using them to find bodies where buildings have collapsed and there is a good chance there are dead bodies there, they will be seen as reliable. But they do and have give misleading indications. The fact is, if they were accurate to within an acceptable level, their findings would be accepted as evidence in court. And it isn't.

The scent isn't from a dead body, it is from decomposing flesh. This can be present in a cut or a wound. And can be many years old, or passed on to clothing where it remains. In the Shannon Matthews case it appears that second hand furniture carried the odour. If McCann was present in certifying the death of a patient, wearing a certain item of clothing, that scent would still remain. And could be passed on to other items of clothing. I understand there is some disbelief that McCann would take "cuddle cat" to work. Many a day I've sat with one of Abby's cuddly toys on my desk at work or in my bag as she has handed it to be as I drop her off.

I'm also amazed anyone is surprised that lots of evidence of blood was found in an apartment, rented on a weekly basis to families on holiday. Seriously? If you think that's unusual, then take a job cleaning holiday apartments. You'd be amazed the state these places get in to. Traces of madeleine's blood can be there for all sorts of innocent reasons.

I'm no fan of the McCanns' but I do get irritated with misinformation being peddled as fact.

 

[Debi]

Interesting point of view regarding the use of cadaver dogs in the case
https: //madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39078055/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%2031

This is a good explanation of the use of dogs, backed up by information from the officers who use them.

A cadaver dog indicating a scent does not mean there is or has been a dead body in the area. Of course, using them to find bodies where buildings have collapsed and there is a good chance there are dead bodies there, they will be seen as reliable. But they do and have give misleading indications. The fact is, if they were accurate to within an acceptable level, their findings would be accepted as evidence in court. And it isn't.

The scent isn't from a dead body, it is from decomposing flesh. This can be present in a cut or a wound. And can be many years old, or passed on to clothing where it remains. In the Shannon Matthews case it appears that second hand furniture carried the odour. If McCann was present in certifying the death of a patient, wearing a certain item of clothing, that scent would still remain. And could be passed on to other items of clothing. I understand there is some disbelief that McCann would take "cuddle cat" to work. Many a day I've sat with one of Abby's cuddly toys on my desk at work or in my bag as she has handed it to be as I drop her off.

I'm also amazed anyone is surprised that lots of evidence of blood was found in an apartment, rented on a weekly basis to families on holiday. Seriously? If you think that's unusual, then take a job cleaning holiday apartments. You'd be amazed the state these places get in to. Traces of madeleine's blood can be there for all sorts of innocent reasons.

I'm no fan of the McCanns' but I do get irritated with misinformation being peddled as fact.

Am I right in thinking though that the dogs were walked through the entire hotel complex and the only place they signalled was in the McAnns apartment?

 

[Foogirl]

Am I right in thinking though that the dogs were walked through the entire hotel complex and the only place they signalled was in the McAnns apartment?

If they did it would be because they weren't given the command to check. You really think in an entire hotel complex, a blood sniffer dog would not pick something up somewhere?

 

[Debi]

I would have thought they would have wanted the dogs to search the whole place for any scents that could lead them to Maddy? Or do you think the handlers were being biased somehow, unconsciously perhaps? I suppose you would expect the blood dog at least to signal elsewhere.

 

[Foogirl]

I would have thought they would have wanted the dogs to search the whole place for any scents that could lead them to Maddy? Or do you think the handlers were being biased somehow, unconsciously perhaps? I suppose you would expect the blood dog at least to signal elsewhere.

To search the entire complex would be unworkable and unnecessary. The remit would be to search places she was known to be, or most likely to be so the apartment and boot of the car seems like a good start. But again to be clear, the dogs were not finding Maddie's scent, they are not trained in that way. They will indicate the presence of decomposing flesh, or blood but cannot specifically find those scents belonging to an individual.

To be honest, this is where shows like CSI area a real hindrance to forensic detectives. They do not portray real life forensic work at all. And very few of the techniques they use in these shows even exist. (Not aiming that at you Debi, just a general response to most of the "evidence" that many feel exists here)

 

[Debi]

So do you reckon the dogs would have signalled in most of the other rooms in the complex had they been told to search? Do they just give the police an idea of where to look for dna? I'm failing to see the point in them now...

 

[Foogirl]

So do you reckon the dogs would have signalled in most of the other rooms in the complex had they been told to search? Do they just give the police an idea of where to look for dna? I'm failing to see the point in them now...

Very probably. Have a nose bleed, clean it up and a blood dog will give an indication. The "cadaver" dog is likely to pick up scents which can indicate someone has died, but again that scent can be present for a plethora of innocent reasons.

The point of them is to indicate areas where forensic evidence can be more targeted. They are used more to rule out death than to rule it in. So if someone goes missing and no scent is found where they lived or were supposedly taken from then investigators don't waste time on gathering forensics. If there is a scent indicated then more searching is done. And they are good at finding bodies trapped in situations like earthquakes etc.

 

[Tiff]

They are very good at finding buried bodies. My father works with them, has for the past 10 years and they've never given a "false positive" when searching for buried bodies in fire scenes.

He doesn't work in just house fires where its a small, contained space... he's worked with them in huge factories that have caught fire or entire complexes.

 

[Foogirl]

They are very good at finding buried bodies. My father works with them, has for the past 10 years and they've never given a "false positive" when searching for buried bodies in fire scenes.

He doesn't work in just house fires where its a small, contained space... he's worked with them in huge factories that have caught fire or entire complexes.

Definitely useful where there are actually bodies. In that situation there is a strong scent as the decomposition is actually still there. Where they are known to give "false positives" is where the source of the scent is no longer present. In that respect they are simply indicating that a scent is present, what or whom that scent belongs to is something they can't detect.

 

[TriChick]

How long does the body need to be decomposing for it to release a scent strong enough to be detected by the dogs? I just find the hit in the apartment hard to believe, as the time between when she was last seen and when the alarm was raised seems to be fairly short for a body to begin legitimate decomposition? I could be wrong though...

 

[Foogirl]

How long does the body need to be decomposing for it to release a scent strong enough to be detected by the dogs? I just find the hit in the apartment hard to believe, as the time between when she was last seen and when the alarm was raised seems to be fairly short for a body to begin legitimate decomposition? I could be wrong though...

That's a very valid point. I have no idea how long decomposition takes to begin but I wouldn't have thought it was a quick process.