because in my world, no evidential or intelligence reliability means exactly that. none.
whereas you are claiming its 'ridiculous' not to see them as 'extremely significant'.
The dog alerts are obviously significant - which is why law enforcement continue to use them to search areas which have been found to have no body.
In the McCann case there were 9 alerts - all McCann related - even though the dog searched other apartments and locations. Pure chance perhaps - but the odds of this happening are astronomical.
The dog alerts are obviously significant - which is why law enforcement continue to use them to search areas which have been found to have no body.
In the McCann case there were 9 alerts - all McCann related - even though the dog searched other apartments and locations. Pure chance perhaps - but the odds of this happening are astronomical.
well, i know they are significant to people attempting to construct a flimsy case against the mccanns. but in making them so you have to go directly against the handlers advice.
oh, and don't forget the possibility of cross contamination as a result of a number of different scenarios. or however grime put it.
The dog alerts are obviously significant - which is why law enforcement continue to use them to search areas which have been found to have no body.
In the McCann case there were 9 alerts - all McCann related - even though the dog searched other apartments and locations. Pure chance perhaps - but the odds of this happening are astronomical.
I too feel that the dog alerts are significant. And the reactions of Kate and Gerry McCann to those alerts may well be significant too. The way they cherry pick which bits of information to highlight (Jane Tanner's sighting) and those they ridicule or ignore (the dogs and the Smith family sighting).
well, i know they are significant to people attempting to construct a flimsy case against the mccanns. but in making them so you have to go directly against the handlers advice.
oh, and don't forget the possibility of cross contamination as a result of a number of different scenarios. or however grime put it.
and milk teeth.
The dog sniffed all over the Ocean Club, the other apartments, Murat's house, etc yet there was cross-contamination and milk teeth only at places related to the McCanns? Odds against this are huge, astronomical in fact.
I report my wife missing and she is never seen again. Not a trace of her is ever found. A cadaver dog searches all the houses in my street but only alerts in my house. Guess police should should ignore that and conclude she was taken alive from my house by an abductor.
The dog sniffed all over the Ocean Club, the other apartments, Murat's house, etc yet there was cross-contamination and milk teeth only at places related to the McCanns? Odds against this are huge, astronomical in fact.
the fact is the handler attached no 'evidential or intelligence reliability' to the alerts and there was absolutely no evidence found to corroborate them .
well, i know they are significant to people attempting to construct a flimsy case against the mccanns. but in making them so you have to go directly against the handlers advice.
oh, and don't forget the possibility of cross contamination as a result of a number of different scenarios. or however grime put it.
and milk teeth.
The dogs alerted to something happening in the apartment.
death and blood.
They dont know who the scent belongs to or how the person died or bled. They dont know all they know is that they are highly trained and have to react to what they are trained for and that is what they do.
For example.
The dog indicated cadavarine in the kate Prout case in gloucester. I live there. People then poo pooed the dog as getting it wrong, as no body had been found. AT THAT TIME.
All the dog was telling his handler was ... look I can smell what i am trained to smell and so it barks....
That is it.
So the handler then knows someone had died there, when that person died is another matter. Its up to the police then to investigate.
As I said people in gloucester some people were laughing about the dog at the time who were pro Adrian Prout (her husband) BUT the dog had the last laugh because they found her body, and the guy admitted to strangling his wife at the spot where the dog indicated her death and where he left her to lay behind the settee.
So really all the dogs do is alert that is it.
9 times in the McCann case even on a Tshirt and pair of trousers belonging to the missing child how odd.
IF that had been me and my daughter had gone missing and after 3 months still not found, and the dogs alerted I would have been beside myself with worry. Was the child harmed in the apartment. I would not have reacted the way Kate McCann reacted and she reacted in a bizarre way according to her OWN BOOK. Also Gerry McCann made a stupid comment about the dogs to Portugese journalist. He would have been better not saying anything.
Did the parents harm their daughter I have no idea. I dont think so but something not right happened in that apartment I am sure of it.
But we will NEVER KNOW, no amount of discussing it will make any difference.
Maybe one day sadly her body will be found. Perhaps she did wonder off after climbing over the child gate. Bodies are found years afterwards by chance and so it could happen with this poor child.
Poor sweet child. I hope she is alive and i hope someone has her who loves her.
To think otherwise is just too hard to bear. Poor little mite.
9 times in the McCann case even on a Tshirt and pair of trousers belonging to the missing child how odd.
you just reminded me that several of the alerts were only made on a 'second sweep' after the items had been moved. if the dogs are as reliable as claimed, how could this possibly be?
ETA i think possibly one reason the mccanns were less than delighted with the dogs is because by that point it was clear that amaral was trying to pin the crime onto them.
The dog sniffed all over the Ocean Club, the other apartments, Murat's house, etc yet there was cross-contamination and milk teeth only at places related to the McCanns? Odds against this are huge, astronomical in fact.
I report my wife missing and she is never seen again. Not a trace of her is ever found. A cadaver dog searches all the houses in my street but only alerts in my house. Guess police should should ignore that and conclude she was taken alive from my house by an abductor.
Isn't that what happened in the USA to Zapata, I think?
Wasn't he held up as some sort of poster boy for false positive dog alerts - until 30 years after his wife went missing and he confessed, and said where the dogs alerted was actually not false psositve at all?
There's a lot riding on them bloody cadaver dogs, the hopes and dreams, and ill thought out dodgy theories, of thousands of conspiracists hang on the effectiveness of canine olfactory senses.
If their noses are 3000 times more sensitive than humans how come they never flinch when they smell their own farts ?
you just reminded me that several of the alerts were only made on a 'second sweep' after the items had been moved. if the dogs are as reliable as claimed, how could this possibly be?
ETA i think possibly one reason the mccanns were less than delighted with the dogs is because by that point it was clear that amaral was trying to pin the crime onto them.
How could he wasnt he taken off the case by the time the dogs were brought in.
I thought the police were actually after Murat not the McCanns and that is whey they brought the dogs in.
I honestly believe that the police thought the dogs would find something at Murats place not the McCanns apartment, clothing, car etc. I am sure of it.
IF the police in Portugal thought the child had been abducted by someone unknown they would not have closed the case surely....it wasnt just Amaral who was suspicious of the family it was the British police who actually told the PJ to have the dogs in the first place.
IF this was a missing case in the UK or the USA the parents are ALWAYS the first suspects.
Amaral was just one police man who was taken off the case anyway before the dogs arrived at the scene. The Portugese Police force does not co-exist with one man only.
Isn't that what happened in the USA to Zapata, I think?
Wasn't he held up as some sort of poster boy for false positive dog alerts - until 30 years after his wife went missing and he confessed, and said where the dogs alerted was actually not false psositve at all?
Yes you are quite correct.
The FBI are using the dogs at the moment to close a few cases I believe.
Funny isnt it. We spend thousands of pounds training dogs to sniff out explosive material, drugs and stuff and their accuracy rate is like almost perfect.
We can train them to alert to cancers now, and to also warn owners that they might be going into an epileptic fit.
We train dogs to find people who are lost and so many are found even in earthquakes by these dogs.
Dogs are mans best friend..but not at 5A it would seem.
These dogs are so highly trained to make such glaring mistakes 9 times well they would be taken out of service thats a fact. They would not be able to use them again.
And thats a fact.
The dogs dont lie they just use their nose to alert to substance etc they are trained to alert to.
How could he wasnt he taken off the case by the time the dogs were brought in.
no, the dogs were brought in in august, amaral was sacked in october.
IF this was a missing case in the UK or the USA the parents are ALWAYS the first suspects.
i don't have any problem with parents / family being considered as possible suspects and investigated, nor with the use of the dogs. i agree with the comments of the dog handler, and with reports of the PJ and attorney general.
its not me that is ignoring all the facts to make a sort of fantasy crime / conspiracy in which the parents are implicated.
no, the dogs were brought in in august, amaral was sacked in october.
i don't have any problem with parents / family being considered as possible suspects and investigated, nor with the use of the dogs. i agree with the comments of the dog handler, and with reports of the PJ and attorney general.
its not me that is ignoring all the facts to make a sort of fantasy crime / conspiracy in which the parents are implicated.
And again, why does bearing the dog alerts in mind automatically mean ignoring the facts (bearing in mind the dog alerts are, in fact, a fact anyway) for some sort of fantasy crime/conspiracy?
Why is it parents innocent = dogs wrong.
Just imagine for a moment that both are telling the truth - the parents don't know what happened to Madeleine and the dogs are right. What then?
There's a lot riding on them bloody cadaver dogs, the hopes and dreams, and ill thought out dodgy theories, of thousands of conspiracists hang on the effectiveness of canine olfactory senses.
Theories are not the only dodgy things in this case. There's the Tapas timeline, Jane Tanner passing Gerry on the pavement but he doesn't see her, the window that was/wasn't forced open, the whereabouts of cuddlecat etc.
More importantly, what hangs on all this is the discovery of what happened to a small defenceless child.
Isn't that what happened in the USA to Zapata, I think?
Wasn't he held up as some sort of poster boy for false positive dog alerts - until 30 years after his wife went missing and he confessed, and said where the dogs alerted was actually not false psositve at all?
That's right, The McCanns consulted Zapata's defence team, with regard to dismissing the cadaver dog evidence.
From the Daily Mail:
Although they do not know the full details of Portuguese prosecutors' case against them, the McCanns are concerned it may rest on the dog's reaction.
They want to highlight the judge's dismissal of cadaver dog evidence in the high-profile Eugene Zapata murder trial in Madison, Wisconsin.
The couple's lawyers have already contacted Zapata's defence team, who are now sending their large file on the matter to Britain.
Zapata's estranged wife, flight instructor Jeanette Zapata, was 37 when she vanished on October 11 1976 after seeing her three children off to school. Her body has never been found.
Detectives suspected Zapata of involvement in her disappearance but did not charge him because of a lack of evidence.
Police decided to conduct new searches using cadaver dogs, a new investigative technique, when an old friend of Mrs Zapata contacted them about the case in 2004.
Zapata, 68, was charged with first-degree murder last year after the dogs indicated they sniffed human remains in a small basement "crawl space" at the former family home in Madison and other properties linked to him.
But Dane County Judge Patrick Fiedler ruled last month that the evidence that led to the charge could not be put before the jury.
He said the dogs were too unreliable in detecting the odour of remains and noted that no remains were actually found.
And again, why does bearing the dog alerts in mind automatically mean ignoring the facts (bearing in mind the dog alerts are, in fact, a fact anyway) for some sort of fantasy crime/conspiracy?
Why is it parents innocent = dogs wrong.
Just imagine for a moment that both are telling the truth - the parents don't know what happened to Madeleine and the dogs are right. What then?
I believe they have thought of this. To quote Clarence; "If she is dead, then she is dead".
And again, why does bearing the dog alerts in mind automatically mean ignoring the facts (bearing in mind the dog alerts are, in fact, a fact anyway) for some sort of fantasy crime/conspiracy?
'bearing them in mind' as unexplained events is fine by me. thats exactly what i do with them.
its ignoring the handlers advice and attributing them as 'highly significant' and using them as a mainstay of an imaginary case against the mccanns that causes problems.
And again, why does bearing the dog alerts in mind automatically mean ignoring the facts (bearing in mind the dog alerts are, in fact, a fact anyway) for some sort of fantasy crime/conspiracy?
Why is it parents innocent = dogs wrong.
Just imagine for a moment that both are telling the truth - the parents don't know what happened to Madeleine and the dogs are right. What then?
And again, why does bearing the dog alerts in mind automatically mean ignoring the facts (bearing in mind the dog alerts are, in fact, a fact anyway) for some sort of fantasy crime/conspiracy?
Why is it parents innocent = dogs wrong.
Just imagine for a moment that both are telling the truth - the parents don't know what happened to Madeleine and the dogs are right. What then?
This sounds perfectly sensible to me.
What I can't get my head around is Gerry's ridiculing of the the dogs in general and their alerts in particular.
I can't help feeling that his reaction is significant.
no, the dogs were brought in in august, amaral was sacked in october.
i don't have any problem with parents / family being considered as possible suspects and investigated, nor with the use of the dogs. i agree with the comments of the dog handler, and with reports of the PJ and attorney general.
its not me that is ignoring all the facts to make a sort of fantasy crime / conspiracy in which the parents are implicated.
I am looking outside the box here.
Its by their own actions that people draw their conclusions.
It is odd that the dogs main alert was the wardrobe.
Did the abductor hide in this wardrobe when he/she heard someone coming to check the children?
Heres a point for you. WHATIF the abductor had death smell on them..........perhaps this abductor had killed someone prior or had been near a dead body. Wouldnt the dog indicate in this regard? I am sure it would.
Perhaps the abductor touched items in the apartment to spread this scent, maybe thinking they could take some clothing for the child, so touched one or two items (Tshirt and trousers), but thought better of it, and just took the child out after administering some chloroform but spreading a death scent through the apartment.
Perhaps the abductor worked in the grave yard or mortuary. Could they have been other people staying their who had touched dead bodies other doctors for example apart from the group.
No more far fetched then having a window of opportunity in 3 minutes according to the timeline to be honest to go into an apartment, find the child, chloroform, and then take the child out into the night down the steps surely they would have walked slap bang into Gerry and the other guy.
I actually think the child was taken as soon as the McCanns went out for their dinner. I believe the child was gone by 8.30 at the latest.
Any other sighting by anyone before 10pm for me was probably just to cover tracks perhaps. I know people who have left their kids in apartments and never open the door to check on them just incase it wakes the kids up, but they stand outside listening. IF they dont hear anything they go back and carry on enjoying themselves.
No i think Maddy was long gone by upto nearly 2 hours. Time enough to be nearly in Spain or other country's or even on the sea in a small boat.
Anyway we will never know what happened to her sadly all we do know is she is missing.
Well just my opinion and not fact and just saying , I would tend to believe awell trained dog before I would believe Gerry Mc Cann . A dog has no agenda , he just does as he is trained to
Although the evidence was excluded from Zapata's first trial, police said corpse-sniffing dogs indicated the scent of human remains at the Indian Trace home and two other homes occupied by Zapata as well as a storage locker and a rental car. Based on Zapata's statement, the locker and car indications were correct.
The PJ report and the AG's report come to distinctly different conclusions from those drawn by amaral - eg no evidence of any crime committed by the mccanns.
amaral was sacked from the case for non professional conduct and subsequently convicted of corruption. i do think you have to have treat everything about him and his 'theories' with a great deal of caution.
Actually, they don't come to distinctly different conclusions at all.
From the Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch:
….While it is an unavoidable fact that Madeleine disappeared from Apartment 5A of the 'Ocean Club', the manner and circumstances under which this happened are not – despite the numerous diligences made in that sense -, therefore, the range of crimes that were indicated and referred to during the inquiry remains untouched…..
…. Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively – the most dramatic – to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
Therefore we do not possess any minimally solid and rigorous foundation in order to be able to state, with the safety that is requested, what was, or were, the exact and precise crime(s) that was or were practiced on the person of the minor Madeleine McCann – apart from the supposed but dismissed crime of exposure or abandonment – or to hold anyone responsible over its authorship….
Therefore, after all seen, analysed and duly pondered, with all that is left exposed, it is determined:
a) The archiving of the Process concerning arguido Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, because there are no indications of the practice of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code;
b) The archiving of the Process concerning arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practice of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code.
So, no evidence of any crime. Which is different to, “no evidence of any crime committed by the mccanns”.
And according to both the Policia Judiciaria and the Public Prosecutor, all hypotheses still stand.
Can I ask what was his reaction? I've seen this mentioned several times now.
In 2008, a Portuguese TV interviewer asked: “How can you explain the scent of cadaver found by the British dogs?” Kate McCann replied: “Maybe you should ask the judiciary. They have examined all evidence”. When the interviewer pressed Kate McCann for an explanation, Gerry McCann intervened, smirking, and replied: “Ask the dogs, Sandra”.
Comments
The dog alerts are obviously significant - which is why law enforcement continue to use them to search areas which have been found to have no body.
In the McCann case there were 9 alerts - all McCann related - even though the dog searched other apartments and locations. Pure chance perhaps - but the odds of this happening are astronomical.
well, i know they are significant to people attempting to construct a flimsy case against the mccanns. but in making them so you have to go directly against the handlers advice.
oh, and don't forget the possibility of cross contamination as a result of a number of different scenarios. or however grime put it.
and milk teeth.
I too feel that the dog alerts are significant. And the reactions of Kate and Gerry McCann to those alerts may well be significant too. The way they cherry pick which bits of information to highlight (Jane Tanner's sighting) and those they ridicule or ignore (the dogs and the Smith family sighting).
The dog sniffed all over the Ocean Club, the other apartments, Murat's house, etc yet there was cross-contamination and milk teeth only at places related to the McCanns? Odds against this are huge, astronomical in fact.
I report my wife missing and she is never seen again. Not a trace of her is ever found. A cadaver dog searches all the houses in my street but only alerts in my house. Guess police should should ignore that and conclude she was taken alive from my house by an abductor.
the fact is the handler attached no 'evidential or intelligence reliability' to the alerts and there was absolutely no evidence found to corroborate them .
The dogs alerted to something happening in the apartment.
death and blood.
They dont know who the scent belongs to or how the person died or bled. They dont know all they know is that they are highly trained and have to react to what they are trained for and that is what they do.
For example.
The dog indicated cadavarine in the kate Prout case in gloucester. I live there. People then poo pooed the dog as getting it wrong, as no body had been found. AT THAT TIME.
All the dog was telling his handler was ... look I can smell what i am trained to smell and so it barks....
That is it.
So the handler then knows someone had died there, when that person died is another matter. Its up to the police then to investigate.
As I said people in gloucester some people were laughing about the dog at the time who were pro Adrian Prout (her husband) BUT the dog had the last laugh because they found her body, and the guy admitted to strangling his wife at the spot where the dog indicated her death and where he left her to lay behind the settee.
So really all the dogs do is alert that is it.
9 times in the McCann case even on a Tshirt and pair of trousers belonging to the missing child how odd.
IF that had been me and my daughter had gone missing and after 3 months still not found, and the dogs alerted I would have been beside myself with worry. Was the child harmed in the apartment. I would not have reacted the way Kate McCann reacted and she reacted in a bizarre way according to her OWN BOOK. Also Gerry McCann made a stupid comment about the dogs to Portugese journalist. He would have been better not saying anything.
Did the parents harm their daughter I have no idea. I dont think so but something not right happened in that apartment I am sure of it.
But we will NEVER KNOW, no amount of discussing it will make any difference.
Maybe one day sadly her body will be found. Perhaps she did wonder off after climbing over the child gate. Bodies are found years afterwards by chance and so it could happen with this poor child.
Poor sweet child. I hope she is alive and i hope someone has her who loves her.
To think otherwise is just too hard to bear. Poor little mite.
you just reminded me that several of the alerts were only made on a 'second sweep' after the items had been moved. if the dogs are as reliable as claimed, how could this possibly be?
ETA i think possibly one reason the mccanns were less than delighted with the dogs is because by that point it was clear that amaral was trying to pin the crime onto them.
Isn't that what happened in the USA to Zapata, I think?
Wasn't he held up as some sort of poster boy for false positive dog alerts - until 30 years after his wife went missing and he confessed, and said where the dogs alerted was actually not false psositve at all?
If their noses are 3000 times more sensitive than humans how come they never flinch when they smell their own farts ?
How could he wasnt he taken off the case by the time the dogs were brought in.
I thought the police were actually after Murat not the McCanns and that is whey they brought the dogs in.
I honestly believe that the police thought the dogs would find something at Murats place not the McCanns apartment, clothing, car etc. I am sure of it.
IF the police in Portugal thought the child had been abducted by someone unknown they would not have closed the case surely....it wasnt just Amaral who was suspicious of the family it was the British police who actually told the PJ to have the dogs in the first place.
IF this was a missing case in the UK or the USA the parents are ALWAYS the first suspects.
Amaral was just one police man who was taken off the case anyway before the dogs arrived at the scene. The Portugese Police force does not co-exist with one man only.
Yes you are quite correct.
The FBI are using the dogs at the moment to close a few cases I believe.
Funny isnt it. We spend thousands of pounds training dogs to sniff out explosive material, drugs and stuff and their accuracy rate is like almost perfect.
We can train them to alert to cancers now, and to also warn owners that they might be going into an epileptic fit.
We train dogs to find people who are lost and so many are found even in earthquakes by these dogs.
Dogs are mans best friend..but not at 5A it would seem.
These dogs are so highly trained to make such glaring mistakes 9 times well they would be taken out of service thats a fact. They would not be able to use them again.
And thats a fact.
The dogs dont lie they just use their nose to alert to substance etc they are trained to alert to.
i don't have any problem with parents / family being considered as possible suspects and investigated, nor with the use of the dogs. i agree with the comments of the dog handler, and with reports of the PJ and attorney general.
its not me that is ignoring all the facts to make a sort of fantasy crime / conspiracy in which the parents are implicated.
And again, why does bearing the dog alerts in mind automatically mean ignoring the facts (bearing in mind the dog alerts are, in fact, a fact anyway) for some sort of fantasy crime/conspiracy?
Why is it parents innocent = dogs wrong.
Just imagine for a moment that both are telling the truth - the parents don't know what happened to Madeleine and the dogs are right. What then?
Theories are not the only dodgy things in this case. There's the Tapas timeline, Jane Tanner passing Gerry on the pavement but he doesn't see her, the window that was/wasn't forced open, the whereabouts of cuddlecat etc.
More importantly, what hangs on all this is the discovery of what happened to a small defenceless child.
That's right, The McCanns consulted Zapata's defence team, with regard to dismissing the cadaver dog evidence.
From the Daily Mail:
I believe they have thought of this. To quote Clarence; "If she is dead, then she is dead".
'bearing them in mind' as unexplained events is fine by me. thats exactly what i do with them.
its ignoring the handlers advice and attributing them as 'highly significant' and using them as a mainstay of an imaginary case against the mccanns that causes problems.
What? The McCann's not guilty? NOT POSSIBLE.
This sounds perfectly sensible to me.
What I can't get my head around is Gerry's ridiculing of the the dogs in general and their alerts in particular.
I can't help feeling that his reaction is significant.
Can I ask what was his reaction? I've seen this mentioned several times now.
I am looking outside the box here.
Its by their own actions that people draw their conclusions.
It is odd that the dogs main alert was the wardrobe.
Did the abductor hide in this wardrobe when he/she heard someone coming to check the children?
Heres a point for you. WHATIF the abductor had death smell on them..........perhaps this abductor had killed someone prior or had been near a dead body. Wouldnt the dog indicate in this regard? I am sure it would.
Perhaps the abductor touched items in the apartment to spread this scent, maybe thinking they could take some clothing for the child, so touched one or two items (Tshirt and trousers), but thought better of it, and just took the child out after administering some chloroform but spreading a death scent through the apartment.
Perhaps the abductor worked in the grave yard or mortuary. Could they have been other people staying their who had touched dead bodies other doctors for example apart from the group.
No more far fetched then having a window of opportunity in 3 minutes according to the timeline to be honest to go into an apartment, find the child, chloroform, and then take the child out into the night down the steps surely they would have walked slap bang into Gerry and the other guy.
I actually think the child was taken as soon as the McCanns went out for their dinner. I believe the child was gone by 8.30 at the latest.
Any other sighting by anyone before 10pm for me was probably just to cover tracks perhaps. I know people who have left their kids in apartments and never open the door to check on them just incase it wakes the kids up, but they stand outside listening. IF they dont hear anything they go back and carry on enjoying themselves.
No i think Maddy was long gone by upto nearly 2 hours. Time enough to be nearly in Spain or other country's or even on the sea in a small boat.
Anyway we will never know what happened to her sadly all we do know is she is missing.
Followed not long after by this:
http://host.madison.com/news/article_3f7a7f4f-cb83-5869-b9c6-23532bc49a4e.html
Actually, they don't come to distinctly different conclusions at all.
From the Public Prosecutor's Archiving Dispatch:
So, no evidence of any crime. Which is different to, “no evidence of any crime committed by the mccanns”.
And according to both the Policia Judiciaria and the Public Prosecutor, all hypotheses still stand.
And Amaral was replaced, not sacked.
In 2008, a Portuguese TV interviewer asked: “How can you explain the scent of cadaver found by the British dogs?” Kate McCann replied: “Maybe you should ask the judiciary. They have examined all evidence”. When the interviewer pressed Kate McCann for an explanation, Gerry McCann intervened, smirking, and replied: “Ask the dogs, Sandra”.