Discussion in 'Madeleine McCann' started by Mercsw, Mar 2, 2019.
Is there even a single piece of evidence she was abducted?
The Aussie media are really the only people looking at the case critically.
Not really surprising given the huge payouts the UK media had to make.
I must have watched a different Netflix documentary. After watching it, I downloaded Looking for Madeleine, realizing that it's written from a pro-McCann viewpoint. From the book:
Years later, after study by the Metropolitan Police of the various attacks--and as the public responded to appeals broadcast on Crimewatch--Operation Grange chief Andy Redwood would update the information on potentially relevant incidents before and after Madeleine's disappearance. There had in fact been eighteen break-ins that involved children, he said, in properties where British families had been staying between 2004 and 2010. Five had occurred in Carvoeiro, nine at locations near either Carvoeiro or Albufeira, one in the village of Vilamoura and three in Praia da Luz itself.
In most of the incidents, there had been no forced entry and nothing had been stolen. In one chilling incident in 2006 in Praia da Luz, at the Ocean Club itself, children in a ground-floor apartment had seen a man break in through a patio door. He had taken nothing, but merely stood staring into a child's travel cot.
The previous year in Praia da Luz, however, a ten-year-old girl had been sexually assaulted. Nine children had been sexually assaulted in all. There had been three 'near misses'--where the offender was in close proximity to the potential victim--and six other occasions in which an intruder had been interrupted before he could carry out an attack.
Also re the video of the cadaver dogs searching: in my experience, cadaver dog handlers try to avoid transferring "live" scent (especially the handler's) to sources, and, of course, dead scent to controls.
The face is not shown, but it might be Grime who grabs (with a gloved hand) Cuddle Cat after the dog finds it behind a cabinet door. Cuddle Cat had obviously been placed there so it would be found without the aid of a visual, but it may have contained plenty of handler or handler associate scent. Grime also pretty lavishly touches surfaces in Madeleine's bedroom he wants Eddie to check.
I agree with others that Grime drives home his interest in the McCann car, the one festooned with Madeleine posters. It's OK, imo, to get the dog to recheck, but once the dog leaves, move on to the next vehicle and come back later, treat each car the same. Don't telegraph your investment in having the dog find something.
If you're looking for a big, ripe source, cues and contaminants are less important, I suppose. But that wasn't the case here.
I don't buy into the handler cues
At the airport, drug and Agriculture dogs are constantly specifically directed towards select passengers, bags etc the handler wants to focus on
But if there is nothing to hit on the dog doesn't give an indication
I have had a handler cue an Ag dog to go all over my luggage several times. It's just part of how they work together
My work with cadaver dogs was primarily placing sources for the handlers (and collecting the sources afterwards). This was done so that the handlers wouldn't know where the sources were, and thus could not inadvertently cue the dog on a minute source. From time to time handlers would deliberately try to get a dog to alert on a non-existent source. (The correct response, non-alert, might be rewarded or might be treated neutrally, iirc.) So some dog handlers, at least, are mindful of cueing.
I never would touch a source with my hand, gloved or otherwise. Sources had to be maneuvered in and out of their containers. Nor did I ever see a handler actually touch a surface being searched. Being meticulous is just good practice.
Coincidentally, a show just popped up on Netflix called "Exhibit A." A dog handler who I now know to be Martin Grime is featured in one of the episodes. He doesn't like the description "dog handler" because his job is much more critical to the process than that implies. (Hm.) He was flown in from Britain for a case in Michigan. (Why? There are a lot of certified cadaver dogs in the US.) In discussing his work, he said, "We come up with a scenario...." In the case in question, the scenario was that the small child was beaten to death because she had wet the bed. (It's not his job to help come up with a scenario, imo.) According to the episode, some saliva, some mucus and a small spot of blood were all that were found. (Taking the episode's word for that.) Grime testified in court.
The father says he was carjacked by a guy in a black balaclava. A black balaclava was found a block away by another, homegrown dog. The balaclava find was dismissed by the police for unrevealed reasons. The child was never found. The father, who is black and has a criminal history, is now serving life in prison.
Netflix doesn't always play it straight down the middle, to say the least, but some of the stuff that came out of Grime's mouth gave me pause.
But these were not the 'average' SAR/Cadaver certified dogs, neither was the handler or in the way they were trained thou.
There was a good reason why THESE specific dogs (& Grimes) were chosen & flown out to Portugal by the BRITISH police investigating the case.
All of which is explained in detail within the reports in the P.J. Files.
ETA: Link to files
Netflix documentary on this case released soon
Grime also talks in one of the shows about how the FBI tests his dog. Carpet squares are placed around the edges of a room. One of the carpet squares contains a spot (of what? Cadaverine?). Eddie runs over the squares and finds the carpet square with the spot, which he can do easily. The problem is that Eddie could have become habituated to find the one item with "the spot" on it. At the very least, Eddie should have been proofed occasionally on a setup where none of the carpet squares had any dead scent. (How about two squares with scent?) Maybe Eddie was actually trained like that, but the program didn't indicate such.
So in the McCann case we see clothes arrayed around three sides of the room. Eddie runs along all the three sides of the room (on top of the clothes) and when he's done he goes back and grabs a T-shirt from the middle wall and barks. So why didn't he stop and alert when he ran over that piece of clothing the first time? It looks like Eddie is looking for the one item that's different from the others. In my opinion if you're going to do a search like that, the dog should be on a leash (not on top of the evidence) and he should alert as soon as he finds an item that meets his criteria.
In my brief stint helping out, buying cadaverine for training purposes was discussed. As far as I remember this wasn't done, but if you can buy that stuff in bottles, it's a potential problem.
Did you read my comment? I wasn't questioning why the dogs were flown to Portugal. I was questioning why they were flown to the United States for the case in question.
From my observations the "average" cadaver dog is quite able to do it.
Re: the "blood dog" Keela. In Looking for Madeleine the authors say that according to Grime in order for Keela to locate the source, the blood must have dried in situ. I'm not sure what that means. Don't alert on fallen-off scabs? But even not knowing exactly what that means, we know that whatever it was that Keela located in the McCanns' rental car, it hadn't dried in situ because the car was rented by them three weeks after Madeleine's disappearance.
(In the Netflix program, Amaral suggested that the McCanns kept Madeleine's body refrigerated for those three weeks.)