Adrian Prout Admits To Killing his wife

I have a feeling there are a few twists and turns yet to come, muratfan. For instance, he was convicted of strangling her, but there seems to be no evidence that he did....

He probably did, but I could see wriggle room being found. I am actually none too clear why he took the lie detector test to begin with; I know its been claimed it was to keep his fiancee happy, but she was already convinced he was innocent.

I realise this probably doesn't make sense, but I don't think we have heard the last of this.

That's what struck me as well, HB - don't know what to make of it.

further tests are due to be carried out by pathologists, including on part of Mrs Prout's larynx.

As ever, time will tell.

Does it say whether the hyoid bone was intact?

That's all we know so far, Tony - that thought crossed my mind, too. I would have thought that would be the first thing they would have looked at?

It's an odd business.

bb1 wrote:That's all we know so far, Tony - that thought crossed my mind, too. I would have thought that would be the first thing they would have looked at?

It's an odd business.

I would have thought so too, Bonny.

I don't think we have heard the last of this case, Tony, there are too many oddities?

Oh dear, some of the forkers have just seen the documentary, and a severe outbreak of Dogs don't lie, is underway.

There was never any forensic evidence, no evidence of a crime scene being washed away, and no body. The police assumed she was dead, and a conviction was obained, because Eddie did what he was trained to do. A woman was killed in her own home, and her husband could have got away with it.

Well, he very probably thought he had.

BECAUSE THE DOG ALERTED IN TOTALLY THE WRONG PLACE.

Now, if Eddie had barked inside the lodge, where the woman died, or the nearby pheasant run, where she was buried - that would have been impressive.

But carpet-woofing? Prout must have thought he was home free and clear, that the body would never be found.

And the carpet-woofing had nothing at all to do with the verdict, BTW....

And given what Eddie is on record as having got excited about in Jersey:

http://voiceforprotest.blogspot.com/2010_03_01_archive.html

VT / 9 Trench and gun emplacement containing small personnel shelter. Forensic examination revealed recently deposited tissues that appeared to have been used to ‘clean up following sexual intercourse’. It would appear that the shelter had been used as a venue for courting couples. This alert is within the trained parameters of the dog’s repertoire and is a satisfactory explanation of the alert.

it is not unreasonable to suspect that some romantic interlude was the cause of the carpet-woofing.

This makes a good read
http://www.pawsoflife.org/Library/HRD/Oesterhelweg%201998.pdf

crazytony wrote:This makes a good read
http://www.pawsoflife.org/Library/HRD/Oesterhelweg%201998.pdf

The very one I have been looking for, Tony

It would be interesting to find out just what it is that makes cadaver dogs alert wrongly - is it because the by-products of the human body can be found just about anywhere, without that human being dead?

I notice the forkers don't ever mention this one:

http://findcarrie.conforums.com/index.cgi?board=crimes&action=display&num=1145919431

Quote:



Walton County investigators plan to return to a Social Circle well this morning and continue looking for a 39-year-old woman missing since May 12.

With heavy machinery, investigators dug up about half of a 40-foot-deep well looking for Social Circle resident Tina Marie Hill. The well, located under the porch of a historic house on East Hightower Trail next to Social Circle's city hall, was half-filled with debris.

After noticing a smell coming from the well, Hill's live-in boyfriend, who is refurbishing the house on East Hightower Trail, alerted authorities. The boyfriend, whose name was not available Friday, is not a suspect in Hill's disappearance.

"We don't have evidence of a crime," said Jeff Johnson, director of the Social Circle Department of Public Safety.

Although authorities did not sense any smell coming from the well, they used a fiber-optics camera and cadaver dogs to check the area. Three cadaver dogs alerted authorities to human remains buried in the well, which has not been used for some years, Johnson said.

Sheriff's investigators, along with the Walton County Sheriff's Office, the Walton County Coroner's Office, the Social Circle Department of Public Safety and the Georgia Bureau of Investigation Medical Examiner's Office began excavation of the well on Thursday.

That search cost a lot of money, and was rather dangerous, too.

All for nothing - all three dogs were wrong.

Read on and:

Three days of digging in an abandoned well in Social Circle ended Saturday without finding a trace of a missing Walton County woman.

Diggers reached the bottom of the 38-foot-deep well Saturday afternoon.

"For the last 20 feet, we have hand-dug the well," Lt. Chris Cannon of the Walton County Sheriff's Department said. "We have come up with nothing."

Cadaver dogs had led investigators to suspect they might find the body of Tina Marie Hill, who disappeared May 12.

"Nothing's 100 percent," Cannon said.

And it gets worse:

SOCIAL CIRCLE — Law enforcement officials uncovered the remains of a human body Tuesday and said they may be those of missing resident Tina Marie Hill.

“The autopsy brought us closer to being able to identify the body, but we will not have any conclusive results until DNA tests are done,” Social Circle Public Safety Department Chief Jeff Johnson said. “We don’t have access to Ms. Hill’s dental records, and although the body was somewhat well preserved, all we can do right now is wait for the DNA results.”

On Monday, Social Circle officials received information from an informant who knew details about the case and, after verifying much of the story, proceeded to investigate a wooded area behind the Social Circle Veterinary Clinic located off Spring Street.

While police had investigated this wooded area before, information provided by the informant helped police hone in on a specific area in the woods. Law enforcement officials followed an established trail that led from a nearby neighborhood and, while walking in the wooded area, noticed what looked like two depressions in the ground that “looked suspicious,” according to Johnson.

Local law enforcement contacted the Walton County Sheriff’s Office, who were the lead investigators at the time handling the Hill case. More interviews were conducted to verify the informant’s story and then the Georgia Bureau of Investigation was contacted.

On Tuesday at 8:30 a.m., GBI, WCSO and SCPSD officials began investigating the site with greater attention. Investigators honed in on a specific depression that had leaves and limbs and other debris on it that were piled on top but were not of local vegetation in that area.

The digging started around 10 a.m., and around noon officials discovered what appeared to be a human head. Four hours later, the body of what appeared to be that of a woman had been completely uncovered.

Officials said the body appeared to be crammed into the narrow, 3-foot-deep grave.

I don't see many of the Wonderdog fans boasting about that one.....

You think Eddie was attracted to the delicious smell of dead pheasant, Muratfan?

bb1 wrote:You think Eddie was attracted to the delicious smell of dead pheasant, Muratfan?

I have spoken to a lot of people on the dog issue and the consensus is, Martin Grime broke many of the K 9 training rules reference the McCann case.
The major one being, having both of his own dogs on the same scene working together and he handling them. It is a major no, no, it leads to doubt as to whether the handler is priming the dogs.
Second issue, the dog being given the toy to play with. Cross contamination by the dog was evident. It didn't hit on the toy whilst playing with it only after the toy was hidden did it react. This reaction in the K 9 instructor's opinion was, the dog wanted his toy back
Moving on to the clothes search, the dog picked up the items in its mouth, another no, no. There was also another issue pointed out in the clothes search. Each time the dog lifted then dropped the items, it looked to the handler before moving on. On this search whilst the dog was working, the handler is out of sight. That blew the integrity of the search. No one knows if he was priming the dog. End result, none of Grime's evidence on this particular case would have been accepted by a judge.

crazytony wrote:

bb1 wrote:You think Eddie was attracted to the delicious smell of dead pheasant, Muratfan?

I have spoken to a lot of people on the dog issue and the consensus is, Martin Grime broke many of the K 9 training rules reference the McCann case.
The major one being, having both of his own dogs on the same scene working together and he handling them. It is a major no, no, it leads to doubt as to whether the handler is priming the dogs.
Second issue, the dog being given the toy to play with. Cross contamination by the dog was evident. It didn't hit on the toy whilst playing with it only after the toy was hidden did it react. This reaction in the K 9 instructor's opinion was, the dog wanted his toy back
Moving on to the clothes search, the dog picked up the items in its mouth, another no, no. There was also another issue pointed out in the clothes search. Each time the dog lifted then dropped the items, it looked to the handler before moving on. On this search whilst the dog was working, the handler is out of sight. That blew the integrity of the search. No one knows if he was priming the dog. End result, none of Grime's evidence on this particular case would have been accepted by a judge.

Tony, I'd like to see Grimes own statement and video. Not these faked up files and video by the Fat Levy, to suit the drunken beast of Portimao.
It would be interesting to know If SY have spoken to him. I beleive they will concidering the vital information he is supposed to have.
I know we all have slated him but I just wonder if there's a difference in his say so, and Gonc's.
If there isn't, then I hope he gets his comeuppance like the slimeball will in February.

Maggs wrote:

crazytony wrote:

bb1 wrote:You think Eddie was attracted to the delicious smell of dead pheasant, Muratfan?

I have spoken to a lot of people on the dog issue and the consensus is, Martin Grime broke many of the K 9 training rules reference the McCann case.
The major one being, having both of his own dogs on the same scene working together and he handling them. It is a major no, no, it leads to doubt as to whether the handler is priming the dogs.
Second issue, the dog being given the toy to play with. Cross contamination by the dog was evident. It didn't hit on the toy whilst playing with it only after the toy was hidden did it react. This reaction in the K 9 instructor's opinion was, the dog wanted his toy back
Moving on to the clothes search, the dog picked up the items in its mouth, another no, no. There was also another issue pointed out in the clothes search. Each time the dog lifted then dropped the items, it looked to the handler before moving on. On this search whilst the dog was working, the handler is out of sight. That blew the integrity of the search. No one knows if he was priming the dog. End result, none of Grime's evidence on this particular case would have been accepted by a judge.

Tony, I'd like to see Grimes own statement and video. Not these faked up files and video by the Fat Levy, to suit the drunken beast of Portimao.
It would be interesting to know If SY have spoken to him. I beleive they will concidering the vital information he is supposed to have.
I know we all have slated him but I just wonder if there's a difference in his say so, and Gonc's.
If there isn't, then I hope he gets his comeuppance like the slimeball will in February.

Surely he signed an official statement, Maggs?

http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic35.html

Martin Grime and Eddie and Keela

There we go; notice he at no point commits himself, instead stressing that everything has to be backed up by forensics?

As we now know, it wasn't - Gonc didn't even bother to send most of it for testing.

Personally, I suspect Grime and the UK officers knew the dog work was valueless, partly because of the time issue, partly because of the sloppy, slipshod way the dog searches were done.

That video is the product of one D. Levy, and is little more than a theatrical production.

crazytony wrote:
Surely he signed an official statement, Maggs?

He has done i believe...but remember how the Anti's love missing little bits out

Tony, there doesn't appear to be any signature on Grimes statements.

muratfan wrote:

crazytony wrote:
Surely he signed an official statement, Maggs?

He has done i believe...but remember how the Anti's love missing little bits out

Not just the anti's by all accounts MF. They aren't signed on the originals.

What, Maggs? Surely they must be, if they haven't been signed, they are completely valueless?

bb1 wrote:What, Maggs? Surely they must be, if they haven't been signed, they are completely valueless?

If, there is no signed statement then the search was illegal.
ETA: He was either working in an official capacity for the PJ or he wasn't. If he was, then he must have signed a statement. If he wasn't, then he should never have been filmed with his dogs working on the McCann case.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES_RIGATORY.htm

Are the original, English statements anywhere to be found, or are we back in the situation where we are looking at translations of translations?

[quote="honestbroker"]

crazytony wrote:

bb1 wrote:
Second issue, the dog being given the toy to play with. Cross contamination by the dog was evident. It didn't hit on the toy whilst playing with it only after the toy was hidden did it react. This reaction in the K 9 instructor's opinion was, the dog wanted his toy back
.

From Grime's rogatory interview:

Can you confirm if the signal given regarding the stuffed toy corresponds to a concrete alert of detection of a cadaver, or a mere trick played by the dog?
The dogs were not taught any 'tricks'. EVRD 'signalled' the toy, which at my request was retained by the Judicial Police for future forensic analysis. I have no knowledge of the results of any forensic analysis on the toy.

We know the toy was never sent to the FSS ...

Then there was nothing on the toy.