Mike Spudgun · @spudgun01

14th Aug 2011 from Twitlonger

Just to elucidate the Marting Grime aspect and the Specialist dogs, Eddie & Keela. When the PJ files were first published and issued to some Journalists in 2008, Grimes was interviewed, "off the record" by a small number of journo's including a good friend and colleague of mine who was , at the time, a sub-editor of a National Sunday newspaper.

Grimes made it very clear that he was unhappy with what he referred to as his "treatment" by authorities unknown, (although he did say they were British), who had coerced him, he says, to "play down" the significance of the dogs' findings. Grimes let it be known that Eddies and Keelas 'scentings' were irrefutable, in his mind, having worked with the dogs successfully on very many cases for the many of the Constabularies in the UK on high profile cases.

Grimes stated that he was "instructed" to ensure that in his subsequently produced report, he was to emphasise that the dog's findings were inadmissable as evidence, (which is of course, true, but he had NEVER been instructed on any other case to point this out), and that they were effectively inconsequential without further corroborative evidence.

Birmingham FSS initially suggested in their reports that recovered material, as indicated in spots by the dogs, DID appear to have significant 'markers', consistent with Madeleine's profile. Of course, that initial report, (like so many initial reports in this case), was subsequently CHANGED!

But that's ANOTHER story for another day.......

Reply · Report Post