Of course, they oddly claim, 'the dogs don't lie' and therefore cannot possibly be wrong! Well we know they cannot speak for sure, but can they have been wrong? And if you believe in the McCanns innocence, then they must be!
Kate states in her book and I quote:
"when researching the validity of sniffer dogs evidence later that month, Gerry would discover that false alerts can be attributable to the concious or unconscious signals of the handler. From what I saw of the dogs' responses, this certainly seemed to me to be what was happening here. We would later learn that in his written report, PC Grime had emphasized that such alerts cannot be relied upon without corroborating evidence".
Now take a look at this video.............
Kate states this in her book:
"Now we were in an undergound garage where eight or so cars were parked, including our rented Renaul Scenic. It was hard to miss: the windows were plastered with pictures of Madeleine. In medicine we would call this an 'unblinded' study, one that is susceptible to bias. One of the dogs ran straight past our car, nose in the air, heading towards the next vehicle. The handler stopped next to the Renault and called the dog. It obeyed, returning to him, but then ran off again. Staying by the car. PC Grime instructed the dog to come back several times and directed it to certain parts of the vehicle before it eventually supplied an alert by barking".
I totally agree with her observations.
The apartment 5a from where the child disappeared was well known in the public domain.
Kate also states this in her book:
"In the footage of the apartment next door to ours, one of the dogs began to root in the corner of a room near a piece of furniture. PC Grime summoned the dog and they left the flat".
If this was the case, then it does ask a lot of questions of Martin Grimes and his canine work dogs.
For me, the dogs were most definately led, conciously or unconciously, by the dog handler.
