McCann Case Still Unsolved?

I just finished watching the video of the dog sniffer, and that is exactly what happened. The dog handler was obviously biased in wanting the dog to do SOMETHING about the McCann's car. They did not call the dog back to any of the other cars, or tap any of the other cars. The dog was quite happy to go on to the next car down the line several times, but the handler never moved (as they did with the other cars). The handler stayed at the McCann car, and kept calling the dog back and tapping on it until the dog finally alerted. Also, the dog alerted at the driver side door, not the trunk area or back passenger seats.

If that was my car that was treated differently (and focused on) by the handler, I would say the test had no validity, and that is my conclusion after watching this video.

 

Both you and I are speculating, outlining possible scenarios from a different persective. No problem on my part, after all, we are on a discussion board.

Where does it say the dogs found "nothing"? The hairs in the spare tyre well have been been mentioned over and over again. They may not have been able to test whether the hair was from a living or dead Madeleine, but if it was there, how did it end up there?
The same goes for the blood on the tiles behind the sofa which someone had tried to clean away. Five markers of that blood matched Madeleine's DNA, what is the statistical probabilitiy the blood was hers?

Layperson's impressions repeated still stay the same: they are speculation.

That short snippet of the video is not enough to get the picture. I'll see if I can find the more extensive version I watched a few moths ago.

And in your opinion, the "single soul" on Websleuths who is a "voice of reason" is the poster who believes they are innocent?

I don't know how many criminal cases you have studied, but you would be suprised at the acting perfomances guilty people can pull off if the goal is to save their hide.
I'm not saying that this is what the McCanns did. I'm merely pointing out that one can't claim it was impossible.

You said in a prior post:

"If the McCanns had called off their meal that night instead of being first down to dinner, if they reported in the morning that Madeleine had been "taken" during the night - I'd probably have serious doubts too." (end quote)
And it could exactly have been the thought of such doubts which might have prompted the McCanns to act otherwise.

The "presumption of innonce until proven guilty" is is a construction applied in a courtroom, where the prosecution has the burden of proof.
A true crime discussion board has a whole different setting.
Think of the many offenders who have not been tried and found guilty. Does this mean we should not speculate re their possible guilt? For example, do you think it is "a terrible thing to say" here on on FFJ that the Ramseys are guilty? For they too have not been proven guilty in a court of law.

 

There was a woman in America in the last decade or so who was caught in some kind of scam with her sniffer dogs. She was so ronowned for her cadaver work with LE, she was actually famous for it. Then they found out she had rigged the results. Can't remember how now. Anyone else remember this woman and this story? It was truly sad, because cases then had to be overturned, re-investigated...?

Okay, googled and of course, found the info and an article. (How did we ever live without google?)

I don't know if this is relevent or of any interest in this discussion, but here it is:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/11/48hours/main605483.shtml

 

What an incredible story and what a stupid woman. It does highlight the eole of the handler. In the McCann case the "find" wasn't bones but an "alert", so who knows whether the dog responded to something on the car or to its handler's behaviour?

I would say the video of the dog and car was not edited. The camera appears to keep rolling throughout as it pans around following the dog and he handler, but I'd be interested ti hear an explanation from the handler as to why he treated the McCann's car differently fom all the others - especially when the do apparently lacked interest in it until he tapped it.

 

tapas nine time line

Who was the first of the tapas nine to check on the children?
When was this first check made?
What did this person claim to have seen?

 

Timeline

Maybe we should have a thread for the timeline and corroborated evidence. Would save having to keep posting it over and over.

10am Madeleine and her twin siblings Sean and Amelie were placed in the Ocean Club’s Kids Club while their parents go for a walk.

12.30pm Kate and Gerry McCann collect children. They have lunch at their apartment before going to the Ocean Club swimming pool.

2.29pm The last photograph of Madeleine is taken at the pool. The camera's clock reads 1.29pm, but the family says it was out by one hour.

3.30pm Children return to Kids Club.

5.30 – 6.30pm Children have tea at Kids Club.

6pm Mrs McCann takes children back to apartment while husband starts an hour-long tennis lesson.

6.30pm Mr McCann asks David Payne to check on Mrs McCann and children at the apartment.

7pm Mr McCann returns to apartment and children are put to bed.

7.30pm Mr and Mrs McCann shower and change.

8.35pm McCanns are the first of the group to arrive at the tapas restaurant, 50 yards away from their apartment

9.05pm Mr McCann returns to the apartment to check the children. He enters through the unlocked patio doors sees all three children asleep.

9.08pm Walking back to the tapas club Mr McCann sees Jeremy Wilkins on the opposite side of the road. The men spend several minutes talking.

9.10pm Jane Tanner walks up the road unnoticed by Mr McCann and Wilkins. She sees a man walking across the road in front of her carrying a girl in his arms

9.30pm Matthew Oldfield leaves tapas restaurants to check on group’s children. Sees twins in their cots but does not directly see Madeleine’s bed.

10.00pm Mrs McCann checks children and finds bedroom window open. Twins are sleeping, but Madeleine’s bed is empty

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article3705440.ece

 

Sniffer dog video

Here is the longer nineteen minute video of the car search (scroll down to the bottom of the page).
It was ten cars, and the dog was lead around each car first.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html

 

Checking on the children

And he did not even bother to check if all was well with Madeleine.
He sure could see the foot end of Madeleine's bed - here is the floor plan:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id21.html

The window was near the twins' cots. What did M. Oldfied say about the window? Was it shut or open? Did anything strike him as unusual about it?

 

Thanks for posting that, Rash.

After viewing the video, I can state the dog was not lead around each car first, but I can see why a person might think that. The beginning of the video is only the photographer walking around each car and videoing their individual details and license plates as he counted them. There is no sound of the dog or it's handler, as well as no visual record of the dog and handler with the photographer in that walk around each car. In addition, if you look at the reflection of the photographer in the shiny green VW, you can see it is only him videoing the car. There is no one else with him.

The rest of the video shows exactly what we saw in the shorter clip. The handler "leads" the dog to alert on the McCann car. I can tell you with no reservation that the video search would not hold up in an American court of law as it is so blatently biased. Any defense attorney, even a bad one, would have a field day with it.

Furthermore, the test was invalidated by having the McCann car as the ONLY one with "Find Maddie" posters taped to the windows. No other car had that, so it was obvious that whoever had driven that car had an interest in the case. If they had wanted to make the dog search more fair and equal, they either should have removed those flyers, or taped some flyers to a couple of the other cars to even the playing field.

As I said before, IMO it's obvious the dog realized his handler was going to keep calling him back until he alerted to the McCann car. The fact that the dog alerted to the driver door, and not the trunk (where a body might be placed) or a passenger door (where Maddie also might have been placed) is another clue that the dog was merely trying to please.

 

Thank you for posting the extended video. I watched it through and it shows even more cars which the handler didn't stop at! The McCann vehicle was still the ONLY one he stopped and stayed at and repeatedly called the dog back to. In each of the other cars, he maybe slowed down and pointed to wheels but he then walked on to the next car and the dog followed him. It seemed very obvious to me that the McCann car was the one the handler was interested in - why wouldn't the dog think the same?

I'm aftraid the extended version doesn't change my opinion that the dog may have been reacting to the handler rather than the car. Also, the important thing is the evidence and we know that there was no evidence found with which to incriminate the McCanns.

With regard to the dog in the apartment. What does it mean? Blood? Whose blood? When was the blood deposited? How long can these dogs detect blood for - is it 3 years? That's an awful lot of microscopic blood spots from holidaymakers.

The dog "evidence" may seem damning on the surface but they are just tools - without a find there is no proof of their accuracy.

I think these dogs are wonderful when they do find evidence - drugs, bodies etc but we know they are not 100% accurate.

We can watch these videos and discuss them forever more, but it won't change the fact that the McCanns were cleared due to "lack of evidence that they committed ANY crime".

I did find a news report which said that the McCanns were made arguidos on the "mere possibility" that they might have been involved. Doesn't sound as if the evidence was remotely overwhelming to those who were actually privy to it.

 

What does this prove? The purpose of his visit was to check that all was quiet. I doubt he felt the need to examine the flat! People tend to notice things that a) they are looking for or b) that are very obvious. They may notice more if they have lots of time on their hands, but I guess Oldfield was keen to get back to his meal (or was he the one whose child was sick?).

 

Those videos made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. What clever dogs!

The sniffer dogs often train at Glasgow Airport and the police bring the dogs in one at a time and just let them loose. The dogs go running all over sniffing at people in their bags and in the check-in queues. There is always someone planted in the crowd who has the tennis ball containing the drugs on their person and the dogs eventually find him and start barking like crazy. It's fascinating to watch.

 

Suppose Oldfield was so keen to get back to this meal that he didn't check at all, but later was too embarrassed to admit it?

 

I'm going by the dogs' excellent reputation, Moab, and am I'm sure there exist various methods of training those highly specialized dogs.

 

I don't know about the spaniel's reputation (in the video you posted), but it is obvious the dog's handler was biased and leading it to "alert" on the McCann car.

I had no feelings either way when I started watching the video, and I was shocked at what I saw versus the way a well-trained sniffer dog will react and alert when presented with real evidence.

What Moab said is correct. It was obvious the handler chose the car on which he wanted the dog to "alert." If it's obvious to us, it was also obvious to the dog.

There may be various methods of training the dogs, but there is only one method of evidential discovery for sniffer dogs, and it does not include focusing on one car, patting and tapping it to the exclusion of the others, calling the dog back many times to the car when it tries to go on to others, etc.

A person cannot excuse what the handler did by saying the dog has a good reputation and there are various training methods. That has nothing to do with how the handler acted in this video.

 

Blind squirrels?

Looks like those top sniffer dogs Eddie are Keela are a bit more than "blind squirrels" as you compare them to:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id157.html