[BARLF]

You stated long ago on these threads that you don't have much faith in the "dog science", a tool but not one you would take seriously.(paraphrased of course)

Have you now a changed mind on that subject?

BTW, as I have stated many times: If the dogs had hit anywhere the police wanted them to hit it would have been used by Dusek in the trial. They didn't ,he didn't.

[cyncooper]

You stated long ago on these threads that you don't have much faith in the "dog science", a tool but not one you would take seriously.(paraphrased of course)

Have you now a changed mind on that subject?

No, I haven't changed my mind. My comment above was an observation of the official record (the affidavit) vs. a story, perhaps from the media, about the dog reacting at the new neighbors, and which story some gave more weight to.

BTW, as I have stated many times: If the dogs had hit anywhere the police wanted them to hit it would have been used by Dusek in the trial. They didn't ,he didn't.

They did present such testimony . The cadaver dog at the MH. Some just found the testimony non-credible.