Page 4 of 4

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:37 am
by honestbroker1
Grime lied.

His profile is not dated.

Mark Harrison's profile is dated

23 July 2007

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P9/09_VO ... e_2224.jpg

Martin Grime's profile is undated

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VOLU ... o_2262.jpg

Why?

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2018 9:41 am
by honestbroker1
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANALY ... OLUMES.htm

(Sic)
It should be noted the report made by the trainer /owner of these dogs.
Trainer/owner.

The semantically correct description of freelance Martin Grime.

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2020 2:21 pm
by honestbroker1
This is interesting:

https://www.crime-scene-investigator.ne ... rdogs.html
Each investigation must be handled as though the area(s) to be searched will be a crime scene. Not only must an accurate written record of the HRD team activities be made, but the team must conduct their search so as not to disturb or alter crime scene evidence. For example, some of the techniques used by conscientious HRD teams include use of canines that display a passive trained alert behavior when locating the odor of human remains. The passive response might consist of the dog assuming a supine position or sitting as close as it can get to the source of the odor. The passive alert involves no action on the part of either team member that would destroy evidence. It is also critical that the HRD team recognize the functions of other specialty units involved as a death investigation progresses. Not only must the team endeavor not to damage anything during their part of the investigation, they must utilize flags or other recognizable means of marking sites requiring further investigation and communicate their needs and methods clearly. A written record as well as a verbal explanation of the HRD teams methods or findings should be provided to the lead investigator(s) and crime scene specialist. Mutual respect must be practiced by all investigative counterparts if a search is going to be fruitful and evidence obtained therefrom be of value in future court proceedings.
I'm unsure that dogs trampling all over stuff and one dog picking stuff up in its mouth (as witnessed at PdL with Eddie and Keela) counts?

The criticism of Grime at PdL (distinct from Eddie) is that Eddie had an alert response (continuous barking) not precise enough to indicate exactly what, in the gym and the inspection of clothing, he was alerting to; also that both dogs trampled over stuff and one picked stuff up in its mouth.

Neither dog at PdL should have been used to inspect clothing. Keela not, because, even though none was, had Madeleine's blood been found in minute traces on any clothing, that would not have been remotely incriminating. And Eddie did not possess an alert sufficiently precise to indicate individual items of clothing he might, or might not, have been alerting to.

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2020 3:19 pm
by honestbroker1
Another clue of Grime's status in PdL.

Grime claims in his profile to be a 'subject matter' expert.

Subject matter expertise is something applicable to businesses:

https://www.thebalancecareers.com/subje ... rt-2275099

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:08 am
by honestbroker1
duplicate post

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 10:19 am
by honestbroker1
G-unit at UK InJustice :
People choose to ignore what Mark Harrison told the PJ before Eddie alerted to McCann related areas and items.

Deploy the EVRD to search the house and garden to ensure Madeleine McCann's remains are not present. The dog may also indicate if a body has been stored in the recent past and then moved off the property, though this is not evidential merely intelligence.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm

It seems to me incomprehensible that the PJ should be told that but be expected to forget it when the alerts pointed to something having happened in 5A.
What people choose to ignore is Mark Harrison's retrospective summary of all searches AFTER witnessing all of them.

He expressly omitted reference to Grime and his dogs in all EXCEPT those inspections he (Mark Harrison) originally recommended: (more in a edit)



The timeline of these searches was as follows:


On 31-07-07 the PJ conducted canine searches with a search warrant at apartments in Praia da Luz that had been previously occupied by the McCanns and their friends. [the holiday apartments].



On 01-08-07 the PJ and GNR assisted by a canine, conducted searches on the eastern beach and wasteland in Praia da Luz.



On 02-08-07 the PJ conducted a search warrant at a villa in Praia da Luz currently occupied by the McCann family.



Later the same day PJ officers conducted a screening procedure involving items removed from the McCann’s villa.



On 03-08-07 PJ and GNR officers were given instruction based on translated extracts from NPIA doctrine on search management and procedures. This focused on search procedures relating to buildings and vehicles.



On 04-08-07 and 05-08-07 a search warrant was executed at the villa and gardens belonging to the PJ suspect Robert Murat. This search involved both PJ and GNR personnel supported by civil defence, geophysical equipment operators and a canine handler.



On 06-08-07 ten vehicles were searched associated to the enquiry.



On 07-08-07 the western beach and remaining wasteland areas were searched using canine and GNR personnel.



On 08-08-07 the drains around the apartment block where Madeleine McCann disappeared from were subject to a visual inspection by PJ officers.
Mark Harrison gives no clue who took part in the inspection of vehicles. That is because he never wanted any except those vehicles of Robert Murat to be inspected.

He makes no reference to Grime or his dogs in the 'inspection' of the McCanns' rented villa. Mark Harrison never wanted it inspected in the first place, because Madeleine never lived there.

MH gives no clue who took part in the 'inspection' at the gym, to re-test clothing already ignored once by both dogs in the villa.

Grime never had, at least, a cadaver dog, trained to inspect clothing.

Mark Harrison waited until AFTER both inspections at villa and gym to issue PJ personnel with translated NPIA instructions on how to conduct inspections of/in buildings and vehicles.

That is because Mark Harrison witnessed rank bad practise in the inspections conducted under his gaze.

On a separate note, G-Unit was earlier berating others for their 'obsession' with the McCann case.

G-Unit is steaming up fast to 23,000 posts on UK Justice, at least the majority on the McCann case.

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2020 3:08 pm
by honestbroker1
Perhaps the most recent corruption to the official files of the version of them on line.

At one time, Mark Harrison's report as, I've not the slightest doubt, he, originally, wrote it said simply that two dogs were deployed.

Now his report has Mark Harrison (apparently) describing freelance Martin Grime's private working pets Eddie and Keela as police dogs:

During the searches two Police dogs were deployed and although it has been stated that no physical remains were located in the area these dogs did give indications in several areas.

When was that corruption introduced?

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARK_HARRISON.htm

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:43 pm
by honestbroker1
(Mark Harrison):
The output of this process of reconnaissance and review was a written document entitled “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” (see appendix 2) and submitted to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.

It recommended considering re searching:



- All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.

- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.

- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.

- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.

- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.



These recommendations were based on the fact that these areas had not been previously searched with the specific intent to locate Madeleine McCann’s concealed and deceased body and that the areas recommended afforded likely and obvious places to consider for concealment in such an investigation.
Whose idea was it to look for Madeleine's' "concealed and deceased remains" in the Renault Scenic, hired 3 weeks AFTER Madeleine's abduction, and their rented villa, moved into long AFTER a full-scale police and civilian search for Madeleine?

I'll give you a clue.

It wasn't Mark Harrison's.

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2020 6:57 pm
by honestbroker1
The link below is dated August 2007 and Grime explicitly refers to himself as a 'retired' police officer.

Surely the final and definitive proof that he was, indeed, freelance in PdL.

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P9/09_V ... e_2473.jpg

SYP confirmed Grime 'left the service' in August 2007, but he washed up in PdL in July.

That tends to confirm that being on annual leave in July is his justification for claiming, in his profile, to be 'in post'

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2020 10:45 pm
by honestbroker1
Third post down in the link:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.ph ... 623350#new
In training she has accurately located minute samples of blood on property up to

thirty-six years old.

In order for the dog to locate the source the blood must have 'dried' in situ. Any

'wetting' once dried will not affect the dog's abilities.

Blood that is subjected to dilution by precipitation or other substantial water source

prior to drying will soak into the ground or other absorbent material. This may dilute

the scent to an unacceptable leve1 for accurate location.

It is possible however that the EVRD will locate the scent source as it would for 'dead body' scent. Forensic testing may not produce evidence but any alert may provide

intelligence to support other factors in the investigation of a crime.
More in an edit.

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2020 12:15 pm
by honestbroker1
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.ph ... 11731.2655

With thanks to Myster for this link ....

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01436-8

From the link, this:

Forensic scientists are working with the British military to open the United Kingdom’s first body farm — a site where researchers will be able to study the decomposition of human remains.

Details are not yet finalized, but the plans are at an advanced stage: project leaders hope this year to open the farm, also known as a forensic cemetery or taphonomy facility, after the discipline devoted to the study of decay and fossilization.

Such sites — which have existed for decades in the United States and more recently in countries including the Netherlands and Australia — generate data on tissue and bone degradation under controlled conditions, along with chemical changes in the soil, air and water around a corpse, to help criminal and forensic investigators. Researchers argue that they provide information crucial to criminal investigations that can’t be obtained from equivalent animal studies, but critics say that they are gruesome and that their value to research is unproven.


Science in court: Disease detectives
In the United Kingdom, a site has been selected and work has started, according to documents obtained by Nature under the Freedom of Information Act. The documents don’t reveal the exact site, but suggest that the facility is being developed on land owned by the Ministry of Defence.

Falling behind
The farms take donated bodies and bury them or leave them on the surface to decompose. Researchers can also set up and study specific circumstances, for example by placing bodies in water or in a vehicle in the farm. The world’s first and most famous farm opened in 1981 in Knoxville, Tennessee; at least six more sites have opened in the United States. In recent years, researchers have set up body farms in Australia and the Netherlands, and Canada will open one this year.

The UK project, which many forensic scientists say is overdue, is led by forensic anthropologist Anna Williams at the University of Huddersfield, a long-standing advocate of such a facility. She says it is essential to stop British forensic and related research from being left behind. A report from a House of Lords’ science and technology committee earlier this week lamented the poor state of UK forensic science and called for investment and a more strategic approach to research.


Forensic science: The soil sleuth
Williams would not comment on the plans, which she says are at a sensitive stage. But other forensic scientists, including Chris Rogers at the University of Wolverhampton, UK, agree that such a facility is essential: “I think it’s absolutely concrete that we do need a facility here in the UK. We are falling behind the rest of the world.”

He says that the lack of access to human remains hampers his research, and affects how it can be used in court. “I am someone who will be interested in using it,” says Rogers, who noted that he does not know the specifics of the plans.

Media attention
For years, experts in the United Kingdom have tried and failed to establish a taphonomy facility: a decade ago, a proposal from Richard Arnold, head of funeral-services company Omega Supplies in Sutton-on-Sea, Lincolnshire, was scrapped after it failed to win the support of academic researchers. Senior figures in medical research have also expressed concern that media attention on such a site could dissuade people from donating their bodies for uses such as teaching anatomy.

But Amy Rattenbury, a forensic scientist at Wrexham Glyndŵr University who studies ways to find concealed human remains, says the opposite is true. “People want to donate. I get phone calls and e-mails nearly every week from people asking if they can donate their bodies or a loved one’s body.”

Although the documents don’t reveal where the UK facility will be, the defence ministry’s most well-known scientific site is the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at Porton Down in southern England. The lab analyses chemical weapons but also hosts research into training ‘cadaver dogs’ to find human corpses — work that would be another focus of the new body farm. Porton Down has invested heavily in new laboratory space in recent years, partly to expand its forensic work with police forces. The Ministry of Defence declined to comment on whether the facility was being built at Porton Down.

A view of Porton Down military base.
The Ministry of Defence laboratory at Porton Down is a potential location for the body farm.Credit: Jack Taylor/Getty

The body farm might still require approval from the government’s Human Tissue Authority (HTA), and the documents released under the Freedom of Information Act show that officials are wrestling with how the site should be licensed, ahead of its intended opening this year.

British law allows people to donate their bodies for medical and scientific research. But the HTA issues licences for and monitors the use of remains for only specific functions, known as scheduled purposes, and human taphonomy is not currently listed as a scheduled purpose — although Williams is trying to convince the HTA to change that.

An HTA spokesperson said: “We are aware and have been in discussion with other parties who are themselves interested in setting up such a facility in the UK, to provide advice and guidance where helpful.”
The part I highlight and underline, I think, makes clear that currently, under English law, use of human remains for purposes such as training dogs to find them is currently illegal.

There is this addendum:
Clarification 09 May 2019: An earlier version of this story said that the UK body farm “still requires approval from the government’s Human Tissue Authority (HTA)”. But although the HTA might in future have the means to regulate such a facility, the opening of a body farm is not currently an activity licensable by the HTA. The story has been updated to clarify this distinction.
Meaning, if what Grime and (I'm afraid!) Mark Harrison claims is true, an English dog, at the time, just 18 months from finishing service as a police dog, was taken to America for "enhanced" training in ways, then as now, illegal in England.

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2020 12:42 pm
by honestbroker1
post deleted duplicate post.

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2020 4:56 pm
by honestbroker1
This makes the point explicitly:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/h ... 79721.html

Sic
There are currently no places [body farms] like this in the UK. Researchers would need a change in the law as it is illegal to use human remains for such a purpose.
Grime, apparently, took Eddie to America for 'enhanced' training in ways, then as now, illegal in England, and just 18 months before dog and handler finished service with SYP

The SYP foi answer which says Eddie's training was (sic) In accordance with standard ACPO guidelines (In England and on dead pigs) but which makes no reference to 'enhanced' training on human remains in America, was not poorly researched, just accurate.

Re: Grime-watch ....

Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2020 8:23 am
by honestbroker1
Interesting.

Grime says in his profile that he was "in post at the operational support services", but he doesn't say where.

Also, he doesn't say where in America the marketing fraud of Eddie's "enhanced" training on human remains is supposed to have taken place.

I bet he cursed Harrison for saying it took place at a body-farm in Tennessee. That would have run the risk of the Portuguese running cross-checks. We know that at least one PJ Inspector was deeply and justly sceptical of the whole Grime-show.