Dogs

New Posts

sarx said:
If her family had made that drive during following months (looking for her, for work, a trip to the casino, to visit a friend), the dogs could have been following them. The scent article could have been contaminated or it is also possible for a dog, in the absence of Amber's scent to clamp on to the scent of a family member (just like DNA we have related smells too!).

The articles really vary as to where the trail went dead. I tend to believe the library area (town). I just don't see a dog trailing a scent that tough and then getting that close and not being able to finish the job. This would also point to the fact that perhaps they weren't trailing her but someone else in the family.
Click to expand...

Aha! Now I get it, thanks. PS Do you mean that I actually smell like my family? (Not that they smell bad!)
 
SoCalSleuth said:
Per this article they picked up her scent at her house. A few days ago on this thread, I believe, I posted a link to a SDUT article which identified how they got the scent at her house.
Click to expand...

I must have missed that article somewhere, or the link died. Can you repost please? IMO that is important. Not that it's going to be accurate- MANY times, PD's will not make mention of the exact scent item used.
 
SoCalSleuth said:
This is going to make for some great jokes at the next family reunion!
Click to expand...

No offense, and I understand trying to lighten the mood and also trying to understand SAR work. But a child has died here, and her family grieving. Maybe we should try and stay away from joking about the subject.

JTSYS
 
SuziQ said:
But they all have also said the dogs lead to the spot Amber was found at. Not true at all. IMO, the process was tainted from the beginning because the PI had a hunch he wanted worked and the handlers were paid. We see this all the time in crime investigations. A detective is so sure his theory is right he'll skew the evidence to point to his theory. A paid expert will slant towards whoever is paying him. They will testify for a pros that such and such is scientifically not possible. In another case they will testify for the defense that the same thing scientifically is possible.
Click to expand...

Agree. But still want to see the evidence for 'paid' regarding the dogs. Not saying they weren't- I just want to see the actual money transfer or flight payments or whatever.
ETA: IMO an honest and decent SAR handler will not lie about their dogs' ability, nor will they in anyway falsify results of their dogs abilities, either in the field or in court (if they ever get there.) Nor will they lie to themselves (or if money is exchanged) to the person who is paying them about their dogs' abilities. Facts are facts. There are occasional miracles that occur in SAR work- there are occasional disasters. Still- no need to lie. Anyone who has worked with dogs for extended periods of time under very stressful situations understands this.
 
sarx said:
And... how could a dog that had followed a freeway trail for 20 miles get to within a 1/2 mile of the body and not finish the job? That part should have been easy for the pooch.
Click to expand...

Different dog? Different search? Wrong dog for wrong search? Not disagreeing, just throwing out ideas.
 
sarx said:
But, if we're talking the person who took her, then we would be talking his/her scent article that they were following. Being that they didn't know who took her back when they did the search (and as far as we know they still don't), that seems like an unlikely scenario.
Click to expand...

Unless it was a known aquaintance and there was unknown transference. (?)
 
SuziQ said:
Personally I would think tracking a live scent 6 months old or older would be a logistical nightmare. If it were possible, wouldn't the dogs be following every track a person left for the past six months? Think about all the places you go in a six month period. How do you tell a dog to only track scent for a certain date?
Click to expand...

Okay, I think this may be where some confusion lays. It depends upon the type of dog tracking and what they are scented on. If hypothetically I am carrying around a backpack full of bones for six months, and I go in and out of my local Walmart with it, and I get in and out of my vehicle with it, and I take a stroll out to the place where the bones came from in the middle of nowhere- a trailing/HRD dog will put their nose to the ground when given the scent and follow every path I took for 6 months if they are reminded by the scent. They will spin and double back over and over again and follow the scent of my footprints if my shoes have ever been in contact with the scent employed. Does that make sense?
 
JustToSeeYouSmile said:
Okay, I think this may be where some confusion lays. It depends upon the type of dog tracking and what they are scented on. If hypothetically I am carrying around a backpack full of bones for six months, and I go in and out of my local Walmart with it, and I get in and out of my vehicle with it, and I take a stroll out to the place where the bones came from in the middle of nowhere- a trailing/HRD dog will put their nose to the ground when given the scent and follow every path I took for 6 months if they are reminded by the scent. They will spin and double back over and over again and follow the scent of my footprints if my shoes have ever been in contact with the scent employed. Does that make sense?
Click to expand...
But if you have a trailing dog, how does the dog know the most recent scent? Obviously Amber walked to school the same way everyday, therefore there would be a scent there.

But supposing she was picked up by a parent the day before she disappeared and taken to I-15. Could the trailing dog have picked up on that trail? (not saying she did, but what if?) If not, why not?
 
JustToSeeYouSmile said:
No offense, and I understand trying to lighten the mood and also trying to understand SAR work. But a child has died here, and her family grieving. Maybe we should try and stay away from joking about the subject.

JTSYS
Click to expand...

I wasn't joking about the subject, I was joking about familial scents. The subject matter of what we do here does allow for us to be human in our posts. No one takes crimes against children more seriously than I do--and I don't even have kids. I was there for Daniel Van Dam's, Chelsea's, and Amber's searches and I have donated quite a bit of money to each cause. I've also donated my time helping out Tricia with various legal issues related to Websleuths because I believe in the good work this forum does. Maybe you need to lighten up.
 
JustToSeeYouSmile said:
Agree. But still want to see the evidence for 'paid' regarding the dogs. Not saying they weren't- I just want to see the actual money transfer or flight payments or whatever.
ETA: IMO an honest and decent SAR handler will not lie about their dogs' ability, nor will they in anyway falsify results of their dogs abilities, either in the field or in court (if they ever get there.) Nor will they lie to themselves (or if money is exchanged) to the person who is paying them about their dogs' abilities. Facts are facts. There are occasional miracles that occur in SAR work- there are occasional disasters. Still- no need to lie. Anyone who has worked with dogs for extended periods of time under very stressful situations understands this.
Click to expand...
Agree an honest and decent handler has no need to lie, but some handlers HAVE lied in the past, thereby causing doubt among observers until such time as the handlers in question (in this case, the ones who purportedly tracked Amber) can prove (to the observer) they are honest and decent. Not all people, whether dog handlers or not, tell the truth. Anyone who has ever been lied to understands this, and questions things which sound too good to be true.
 
SoCalSleuth said:
I wasn't joking about the subject, I was joking about familial scents. The subject matter of what we do here does allow for us to be human in our posts. No one takes crimes against children more seriously than I do--and I don't even have kids. I was there for Daniel Van Dam's, Chelsea's, and Amber's searches and I have donated quite a bit of money to each cause. I've also donated my time helping out Tricia with various legal issues related to Websleuths because I believe in the good work this forum does. Maybe you need to lighten up.
Click to expand...

Whoa, easy. just saying... let's be careful about who reads here and what might be interpreted. I, too, am close to many cases. I don't think there are many on WB's that don't have their own story to tell.

JTSYS
 
Ghostwheel said:
Agree an honest and decent handler has no need to lie, but some handlers HAVE lied in the past, thereby causing doubt among observers until such time as the handlers in question (in this case, the ones who purportedly tracked Amber) can prove (to the observer) they are honest and decent. Not all people, whether dog handlers or not, tell the truth. Anyone who has ever been lied to understands this, and questions things which sound too good to be true.
Click to expand...

Agree.
 
Ghostwheel said:
But if you have a trailing dog, how does the dog know the most recent scent? Obviously Amber walked to school the same way everyday, therefore there would be a scent there.

But supposing she was picked up by a parent the day before she disappeared and taken to I-15. Could the trailing dog have picked up on that trail? (not saying she did, but what if?) If not, why not?
Click to expand...

Dogs trail differently on aged scents. Some are older/younger than others. Both 'trailing dogs' and 'HRD' dogs have different levels of scenting ability. Scent that comes from a body that is 1 hour old is different than scent that comes from a body that is 1 month old, which is different than what comes from a body that is 1 year old. These are all different scents then what may have come from a family member or a specific scent article.
 
SoCalSleuth said:
I wasn't joking about the subject, I was joking about familial scents. The subject matter of what we do here does allow for us to be human in our posts. No one takes crimes against children more seriously than I do--and I don't even have kids. I was there for Daniel Van Dam's, Chelsea's, and Amber's searches and I have donated quite a bit of money to each cause. I've also donated my time helping out Tricia with various legal issues related to Websleuths because I believe in the good work this forum does. Maybe you need to lighten up.
Click to expand...

I think we all take crimes against children very, very seriously. I was simply suggesting we keep to the issue of how to help prevent them, or discover- with the help of dogs- how to to uncover the truth of how they have occurred.

JTSYS
 
Ghostwheel said:
Agree an honest and decent handler has no need to lie, but some handlers HAVE lied in the past, thereby causing doubt among observers until such time as the handlers in question (in this case, the ones who purportedly tracked Amber) can prove (to the observer) they are honest and decent. Not all people, whether dog handlers or not, tell the truth. Anyone who has ever been lied to understands this, and questions things which sound too good to be true.
Click to expand...

They have to prove to you they are honest and decent? How so? I shocked at your comment on this forum. These are volunteers.
 
rescuemedic said:
They have to prove to you they are honest and decent? How so? I shocked at your comment on this forum. These are volunteers.
Click to expand...

I don't know why this is so shocking, volunteers are not excluded automatically from the truths of society. Just like people in general, there are lots of good and some bad apples. There have been dog handlers, including one that worked the World Trade Center, who planted evidence to make herself look better. I have seen volunteers do some pretty terrible things to "get the find". Being a volunteer doesn't automatically put you on some untouchable pedestal.
 
rescuemedic said:
They have to prove to you they are honest and decent? How so? I shocked at your comment on this forum. These are volunteers.
Click to expand...
Are you familiar with Sandra Anderson and her dog Eagle? This was a huge letdown for many families and followers. At the time it was unimaginable that she and eagle were not the real deal.
Unfortunately bad people come in all shapes and sizes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 191 more.
Total: 4,623 (members: 192, guests: 4,431)

Online statistics

Members online
192
Guests online
4,431
Total visitors
4,623
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,464
Messages
17,969,291
Members
228,774
Latest member
truecrime-hazeleyes
Back
Top