ok Clydebank, I suspected so

There`s evidence which indicates a dead body in the apartment which given the timeframe of events suggested by the parents takes some explaining.

kkkattt...if you dig down into that sniffer dog evidence it is very easy to discredit it.

Children being abducted from the place they were living is almost unheard of .

The only 2 cases in the UK i'm aware of were 2 where a paedo did snatch a child from their house and take them somewhere to abuse them , both times they took the child because the parents were in the house.

What about there being no DNA in the apartment ? (the police had to get a sample of Maddeleines' for comparison by going back to her house in the UK )

Are minimum wage cleaners in Portugal that thorough ?

David James Smith (Sunday Times), 16 December 2007:

It has been suggested that the HRD dog was treated differently in the McCanns’ apartment than in the others. The dog kept sniffing and running off and it was called back on several occasions. Eventually it 'alerted', meaning it went stiff and stayed still. "Then the blood dog was called in and directed to the area where the other dog had alerted. Eventually this dog alerted in the same place – behind the sofa in the lounge, which is where the trace of blood was supposedly found. "The cars were lined up, not in a controlled environment, but in the underground public car park opposite Portimão police station. Again the dog was led quickly from one car to the next until he reached a Renault with 'Find Madeleine' stickers all over it. The dog sniffed and moved on to the next car, but was called back. The dog was taken around the McCanns' car for about a minute, as opposed to the few seconds devoted to the other cars. Then the dog went rigid, an 'alert', and the doors and the boot were opened. It was this that led to the recovery of some body fluids that the PJ suspected would contain traces of Madeleine's DNA, and which led to the supposed revelation that her body must have been carried in the car.

Daily Mail, October 2009

Eddie the sniffer dog - the animal that had supposedly found the 'scent of death' in the Portuguese flat where Madeleine McCann disappeared - no longer had a licence for UK police forensic work when Harper started using him in Jersey. Eddie, whose owner, Martin Grime, was paid £93,600 for less than five months' work, triggered the first excavations by barking at a spot where Harper's team then unearthed what was claimed to be part of a child's skull. In fact, as a Kew Gardens expert has now confirmed, it was a piece of coconut shell.


SkyNews, March 2011:

A South Yorkshire Police spaniel called Eddie was said to have sniffed out the "scent of death" at the Haut de la Garenne children's home in Jersey and the apartment from which Madeleine McCann disappeared in Portugal. But in both cases nothing more was found and South Yorkshire Police say Eddie is no longer working with them. Victim recovery dogs from four different police forces were used during searches for kidnapped schoolgirl Shannon Matthews in Dewsbury in West Yorkshire in 2008. The dogs found evidence of dead bodies, but officers later discovered the corpses were nothing to do with her disappearance. "The properties searched contained a high level of second-hand furniture bought from dwellings where someone had died," according to the NPIA report. "This resulted in numerous indications that required further investigation to confirm whether they were connected to the investigation, or to previous owners of the furniture."

Archaeology Magazine, 2004:

A 2003 study at the University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, tested the effectiveness of cadaver dogs (dogs trained to detect old and new remains) and their handlers at finding buried human remains. Keith Jacobi, Alanna Lasseter, and their colleagues, tested the abilities of four dog and handler teams to find ten fresh and skeletal human remains items buried between one and two feet deep. Five separate trials were conducted in warm and humid conditions and videotaped...Overall, there were only two alerts correctly signaling the location of remains, four unrecognized alerts and six narrowed area signals, indicating possible communication problems between the dogs and their handlers. In addition, there were six false alerts and 22 no alerts, suggesting significant problems of detection by the teams.

kkkatt
On several occasions in those videos Hyatt states clearly that Kate was lying. Not might be, but definitely in his opinion.

crystal it's inadmissible evidence.  He could quite easily be a self grandiose BS merchant imo.  There is no evidence to back his opinion up or any sign of a professional qualification to back up his inadmissible evidence either.

It's not a case of conclusively proving he got it wrong,  that is impossible.  It's about questioning the veracity of what he allegedly did find. 

The dogs didn't go there until 3 months after the disappearance. Experts have dismissed the accuracy of such evidence. John Barrett, a retired dog handler with Scotland Yard, said "that police dogs can only detect such scents up to 28 days after the event.''

Sniffer dogs are notorious for producing a high rate of false positives.  And ultimately, in this case, there is no forensic evidence that backs up their findings.

Of course it's inadmissible evidence but that doesn't mean that his observations are wrong. I thought his reasoning made a lot of sense. I don't think they killed their daughter but I think they do know what happened to her. That's my opinion based on what I have read and watched.

crystal, what was your opinion before you watched the guy's video?  My guess is the same as now, but he helped reaffirm it?

The problem with this case is that opinions are so entrenched at this stage, many based on non-facts that perpetuate, that objectivity is very difficult.

George B.....it was used nappies if I recall.

GEORGE

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2090-t-why-did-the-mccann-s-need-to-air-their-car-boot-in-the-still-of-the-night

It`s a few years since I read about this in any depth, but I wouldn`t discount the dog evidence on the say so of a single handler. I recall an Irishman reported seeing Gerry on the night in question carrying an apparently sleeping blonde haired girl less than half a mile from the apartment. The problem I`ve always had with the McCanns is that in the few interviews they`ve given they always seem intent on defending their actions on the night in question which even if truthful, in my view are indefensible and they seem less concerned with the wellbeing or whereabouts of their child. Hyatt articulates this better than I ever could.

Am not discounting the dog evidence on the basis of one handler...have given you plenty of examples, there is a mountain of evidence questioning their reliability, especially given the timings involved.

Ultimately they are indicators, at best, after which you bring in Forensics to establish admissable actual evidence. And ultimately no conclusive forensic evidence was recovered on the back of the dogs efforts.

Which day did she go jogging exactly?

Or is it another accepted myth, in the same category as 'Gerry playing tennis in the days afterwards'...something which never actually happened.

I really don't know, I try to remain objective.  And I think too much emphasis is placed on interpretation of how people expected them to behave in the aftermath.  Plus the cat that a huge number of perpetuated non-facts form the backbone of many peoples theories.

If they disposed of her, the most likely place was the large industrial size bins outside the supermarket very close to the complex.  They were emptied at midnight that night and the landfill site was never searched.

But I wouldn't rule any possibility out definitively.  Even the drunk driver possibility.

itcanbedone,  you posted about the shannon matthews case where the dog team (correctly) alerted to a piece of furniture (a bed ?) that the matthews family had bought 2nd hand.  The furniture was traced back to a previous owner who had indeed been in contact with it when they died.  In a subsequent post you said dogs could only detect this scent within a month of death.  But surely in the matthews case it was a lot longer than 28 days. Even if bought recently it would be months at minimum but it could be years.  It may well have been cleaned for sale, and then obviously used by a new family but none of that stopped the dog from getting it right.  There is a reason this particular UK dog team cost so much to hire

Oh sorry i totally confused you with Crags

Can only offer profuse apologies

He was always defending them , i know you weren't actually , recalling previous threads .

Don't know why i mixed you up with him , maybe you used to argue with the same people about other stuff

Anyhow pretty lame of me