Dogs - Page 9

SoCalSleuth · #**201** 03-11-2010, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sarx

Ok, so in this article the dog handler states
"According to Platts, Escondido police never talked to her about their findings."

If the police didn't talk to Platts (the dog handler), then how did they take FBI used dogs into the same area to try and confirm the findings?

I don't know at this point who is telling the truth.

The articles state that she gave them her findings in writing. Obviously she is stating that they never followed up with her on her written report. They had her written report to follow.

rescuemedic · #**202** 03-11-2010, 09:42 PM

why? still impossible to repeat the results unless it was done _outcome based research would imply it had to have happened>remeber this has been repeated over and over >>>>>read the web site>

SoCalSleuth · #**203** 03-11-2010, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rescuemedic

why? still impossible to repeat the results unless it was done _outcome based research would imply it had to have happened>remeber this has been repeated over and over >>>>>read the web site>

Just would like to add that I think it's a lame claim by the PI that the Pala Reservation would be a good place to dump a body. Anywhere outside the residential areas in North County is a good place to dump a body--it's just miles and miles of remote desert.

jjenny · #**204** 03-11-2010, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalSleuth

Just would like to add that I think it's a lame claim by the PI that the Pala Reservation would be a good place to dump a body. Anywhere outside the residential areas in North County is a good place to dump a body--it's just miles and miles of remote desert.

There was a body dumped near that area before -of Leticia Hernandez.

Ghostwheel · #**205** 03-11-2010, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalSleuth

Here's another article:
http://www.examiner.com/x-18953-San-...-August-photos

Also, the media was following the dogs when the search was going on and they showed part of it on the news at the time. Maybe you could locate that??

I am always leary of an online source with editors that allow misspellings.
"The team worked there way to a spot that turned out to be near where Amber's remains were found."

When I see a copy of the dated report, and the actual way they got the dogs to that spot, I'll be impressed. Otherwise, IMO, it's a bunch of talking heads using a story they read somewhere else and reporting it with their own twist (I have already seen that several times on this case, not necessarily about the dogs, though)

Thanks for the links.

Ghostwheel · #**206** 03-11-2010, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalSleuth

The articles state that she gave them her findings in writing. Obviously she is stating that they never followed up with her on her written report. They had her written report to follow.

So the article states. Still not convinced, you understand...last time I'll mention it.

sarx · #**207** 03-11-2010, 09:58 PM

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.

SoCalSleuth · #**208** 03-11-2010, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghostwheel

I am always leary of an online source with editors that allow misspellings.
"The team worked there way to a spot that turned out to be near where Amber's remains were found."

When I see a copy of the dated report, and the actual way they got the dogs to that spot, I'll be impressed. Otherwise, IMO, it's a bunch of talking heads using a story they read somewhere else and reporting it with their own twist (I have already seen that several times on this case, not necessarily about the dogs, though)

Thanks for the links.

But the San Diego Union Tribune and the North County Times are not rags and they directly quote the handler. As does Channel 10 news. All 3 detail how they got to the spot. Still no one has answered the question--if there are alternate explanations then what are they, I am very curious about this--obviously!

Ghostwheel · #**209** 03-11-2010, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalSleuth

But the San Diego Union Tribune and the North County Times are not rags and they directly quote the handler. As does Channel 10 news. All 3 detail how they got to the spot. Still no one has answered the question--if there are alternate explanations then what are they, I am very curious about this--obviously!

Just so you know, they can quote the handler without ever talking to him/her. If it's been printed somewhere else, they can use that as a source, unless they say "News10's Hunky Dory (or whatever name) spoke with Ick-Blah (or whatever name). Then, they HAVE to have talked to the person they said they spoke with. Otherwise, they can use whatever source they want (sometimes the same Google we use). Not to say they did, just that they can.

sarx · #**210** 03-11-2010, 10:43 PM

LOL I can attest first hand to being quoted saying something that I NEVER said and before I knew it it was all over the place. So, I guess I'm a bit jaded on that aspect.

Without knowing the circumstances of the search, the scent article used, the collection methods, etc. it is all just speculation. SoCal, are you looking for speculation and "could haves"?

SuziQ · #**211** 03-11-2010, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalSleuth

But the San Diego Union Tribune and the North County Times are not rags and they directly quote the handler. As does Channel 10 news. All 3 detail how they got to the spot. Still no one has answered the question--if there are alternate explanations then what are they, I am very curious about this--obviously!

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.

SuziQ · #**212** 03-11-2010, 10:51 PM

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?

sarx · #**213** 03-11-2010, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuziQ

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?

LOL, u don't (but that was a funny visual for me, sorry getting slap happy!)
In theory they should be tracking the freshest (most recent) scent left. Dogs often have a hard time getting the trail picked up from say the person's house for that reason exactly. Anywhere where the person frequents is going to leave a huge scent pool with trail after trail overlapping each other.

jjenny · #**214** 03-11-2010, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sarx

LOL, u don't (but that was a funny visual for me, sorry getting slap happy!)
In theory they should be tracking the freshest (most recent) scent left. Dogs often have a hard time getting the trail picked up from say the person's house for that reason exactly. Anywhere where the person frequents is going to leave a huge scent pool with trail after trail overlapping each other.

One would think that after six months it would be really difficult to figure out the "freshest trial."

rescuemedic · #**215** 03-11-2010, 11:46 PM

guys the team was not paid -only expenses for flight/hotel from the ch10 article

they finally talk to one of the handlers there unlike us and imagine what we want to believe-give them credit for being volunteers at the very least -im a paid guy -im amazed at the effort made by these people -you ever read how many they have helped for nothing?

3 miles up that road per the team captain ....wow statitically impossible -and if you think scent article presentation can in any way affect outcome based research your not understanding the scientific approach im using .. sorry...

SoCalSleuth · #**216** 03-11-2010, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuziQ

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.

None of the articles stated the dog led them to the spot she was found at. The handlers were not paid--they are a non-profit org funded by donations. Their travel expenses were paid. The PI wasn't working on the case at the time--and we don't know when he though Pala might be a good spot--if he ever thought that at all.

sarx · #**217** 03-11-2010, 11:57 PM

Do you verified info that they went 3 miles up the road? A report from the team? I found nothing on their site, no documents anywhere about it, just media info.

There are several of us on here who have given decades of our time volunteering ourselves and our dogs, without even a airfare or hotel being donated to us, so I am well aware of the dedication that goes into it.

The family did donate to the organization, but paid or not, that doesn't much matter to me, there are documented cases of people falsifying searches to get the recognition. I am not saying that they did this, but where there is money or glory involved it opens the door wide for dishonesty.

Research doesn't apply here, it's controlled. We've done plenty of case studies, and they are useful but have their limitations. Statistically I look at the real world finds, the real experience I know and know from the SAR community.

SoCalSleuth · #**218** 03-11-2010, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sarx

LOL I can attest first hand to being quoted saying something that I NEVER said and before I knew it it was all over the place. So, I guess I'm a bit jaded on that aspect.

Without knowing the circumstances of the search, the scent article used, the collection methods, etc. it is all just speculation. SoCal, are you looking for speculation and "could haves"?

No, I'm not. But you have posted that if it happened there are other explanations other than following her scent and that is what I am curious about--what other explanations? Thanks!

sarx · #**219** 03-12-2010, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalSleuth

None of the articles stated the dog led them to the spot she was found at. The handlers were not paid--they are a non-profit org funded by donations. Their travel expenses were paid. The PI wasn't working on the case at the time--and we don't know when he though Pala might be a good spot--if he ever thought that at all.

This article states
Around the Pala Mission, and for approximately three miles north on Pala Temecula Road, the dogs found Amber's scent in numerous locations, the handler said.
In the area Amber's remains were found, the dogs again followed a trail, Jones said.
&
For three days, the two handlers, Bart, an Escondido police officer and a private investigator Welch hired followed the dogs. (according to this a PI WAS working the case)
&
"The dogs were going crazy," she said. "Where they really went nuts was in the residential area across the street from the casino."
&
Welch paid the team's expenses.
Handler Julie Jones said the two Labrador retrievers used in that search effort (Which was acting as the team leader, Platt or Jones, they are both in the media. Also, why would she say the two labs when they were not two labs?)

http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/es...73e775ad1.html

Now, in the next article things change a bit
Sarah Platts of the VK9 Scent Specific Search and Recovery Unit told 10News that it took her dogs less than a day (as opposed to 3 days above)
*&
Amber Dubois family had hired Sarah Platts and the search team to look for Amber. (stating they were hired)
&
The team worked there way to a spot that turned out to be near where Amber's remains were found.
quoted from
http://www.examiner.com/x-18953-San-...-August-photos

So, according to these articles, they may have been hired. They did trail up to where the body was found but missed it. The timing was anywhere from 1 to 3 days. There was a PI involved. There was a Escondido deputy with them. She was in the residential area near the casino.

sarx · #**220** 03-12-2010, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalSleuth

No, I'm not. But you have posted that if it happened there are other explanations other than following her scent and that is what I am curious about--what other explanations? Thanks!

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.

SoCalSleuth · #**221** 03-12-2010, 12:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sarx

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.

Aha! Now I get it, thanks. PS Do you mean that I actually smell like my family? (Not that they smell bad!)

sarx · #**222** 03-12-2010, 01:13 AM

LOL, yep, you do. Ponder that for awhile!

SoCalSleuth · #**223** 03-12-2010, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sarx

LOL, yep, you do. Ponder that for awhile!

This is going to make for some great jokes at the next family reunion!

JustToSeeYouSmile · #**224** 03-12-2010, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalSleuth

Here it is again: http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/es...73e775ad1.html

It's an article from the North County Times dated March 8, 2010; author is Sarah Gordon. They said the dogs hit on numerous places approx 3 miles traveling north on PT Road

That one opened for me, but it is extremely confusing IMO.

JustToSeeYouSmile · #**225** 03-12-2010, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoCalSleuth

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.

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.