Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

The present contribution is a PRISMA systematic review of the literature on the forensic use of HRD dogs. This systematic review of the literature examines the types of information provided by the researchers regarding HRD dog-and-handler teams to answer the following objectives: 1. Assess the sufficiency of the provided background information for repeatability; 2. Evaluate the ability of HRD dogs to detect residual scent; and 3. Summarize potential gaps in the literature and future studies. To complete the first objective, this study will progress from Martin and colleagues [2020] and Dargan and Forbes [2021] by taking a relatively more holistic approach by reviewing several variables regarding the selection and training of HRD dogs, as well as the results of the relevant studies. The intention of the second objective is to inform relevant stakeholders on whether there is sufficient evidence of HRD dog-and-handler teams to locate the residual odour of human remains. Residual odour refers to the scent detected by the canines that cannot be corroborated through other means of detection. Such evidence was used in the 2019 Redwine trial, where the prosecution submitted HRD dogs’ alerts as evidence of the presence of the residual odour of human remains [People of the State of Colorado v. Mark Allen Redwine, 17CR343 (2019), n.d.]. The defence challenged its scientific reliability, and although the court acknowledged the lack of scientific reliability, it eventually accepted the evidence as experience-based rather than science-based [People of the State of Colorado v. Mark Allen Redwine, 17CR343 (2019), n.d.]. However, the view of the authors is that because HRD dogs’ ability to detect and track odour is established on scientific evidence, it is not enough if the method and the hypothesis behind the method are not explained and supported by the scientific literature.

The present contribution is a PRISMA systematic review of the literature on the forensic use of HRD dogs. This systematic review of the literature examines the types of information provided by the researchers regarding HRD dog-and-handler teams to answer the following objectives: 1. Assess the sufficiency of the provided background information for repeatability; 2. Evaluate the ability of HRD dogs to detect residual scent; and 3. Summarize potential gaps in the literature and future studies. To complete the first objective, this study will progress from Martin and colleagues [2020] and Dargan and Forbes [2021] by taking a relatively more holistic approach by reviewing several variables regarding the selection and training of HRD dogs, as well as the results of the relevant studies. The intention of the second objective is to inform relevant stakeholders on whether there is sufficient evidence of HRD dog-and-handler teams to locate the residual odour of human remains. Residual odour refers to the scent detected by the canines that cannot be corroborated through other means of detection. Such evidence was used in the 2019 Redwine trial, where the prosecution submitted HRD dogs’ alerts as evidence of the presence of the residual odour of human remains [People of the State of Colorado v. Mark Allen Redwine, 17CR343 (2019), n.d.]. The defence challenged its scientific reliability, and although the court acknowledged the lack of scientific reliability, it eventually accepted the evidence as experience-based rather than science-based [People of the State of Colorado v. Mark Allen Redwine, 17CR343 (2019), n.d.]. However, the view of the authors is that because HRD dogs’ ability to detect and track odour is established on scientific evidence, it is not enough if the method and the hypothesis behind the method are not explained and supported by the scientific literature.

The present contribution is a PRISMA systematic review of the literature on the forensic use of HRD dogs. This systematic review of the literature examines the types of information provided by the researchers regarding HRD dog-and-handler teams to answer the following objectives: 1. Assess the sufficiency of the provided background information for repeatability; 2. Evaluate the ability of HRD dogs to detect residual scent; and 3. Summarize potential gaps in the literature and future studies. To complete the first objective, this study will progress from Martin and colleagues [2020] and Dargan and Forbes [2021] by taking a relatively more holistic approach by reviewing several variables regarding the selection and training of HRD dogs, as well as the results of the relevant studies. The intention of the second objective is to inform relevant stakeholders on whether there is sufficient evidence of HRD dog-and-handler teams to locate the residual odour of human remains. Residual odour refers to the scent detected by the canines that cannot be corroborated through other means of detection. Such evidence was used in the 2019 Redwine trial, where the prosecution submitted HRD dogs’ alerts as evidence of the presence of the residual odour of human remains [People of the State of Colorado v. Mark Allen Redwine, 17CR343 (2019), n.d.]. The defence challenged its scientific reliability, and although the court acknowledged the lack of scientific reliability, it eventually accepted the evidence as experience-based rather than science-based [People of the State of Colorado v. Mark Allen Redwine, 17CR343 (2019), n.d.]. However, the view of the authors is that because HRD dogs’ ability to detect and track odour is established on scientific evidence, it is not enough if the method and the hypothesis behind the method are not explained and supported by the scientific literature.

The present contribution is a PRISMA systematic review of the literature on the forensic use of HRD dogs. This systematic review of the literature examines the types of information provided by the researchers regarding HRD dog-and-handler teams to answer the following objectives: 1. Assess the sufficiency of the provided background information for repeatability; 2. Evaluate the ability of HRD dogs to detect residual scent; and 3. Summarize potential gaps in the literature and future studies. To complete the first objective, this study will progress from Martin and colleagues [2020] and Dargan and Forbes [2021] by taking a relatively more holistic approach by reviewing several variables regarding the selection and training of HRD dogs, as well as the results of the relevant studies. The intention of the second objective is to inform relevant stakeholders on whether there is sufficient evidence of HRD dog-and-handler teams to locate the residual odour of human remains. Residual odour refers to the scent detected by the canines that cannot be corroborated through other means of detection. Such evidence was used in the 2019 Redwine trial, where the prosecution submitted HRD dogs’ alerts as evidence of the presence of the residual odour of human remains [People of the State of Colorado v. Mark Allen Redwine, 17CR343 (2019), n.d.]. The defence challenged its scientific reliability, and although the court acknowledged the lack of scientific reliability, it eventually accepted the evidence as experience-based rather than science-based [People of the State of Colorado v. Mark Allen Redwine, 17CR343 (2019), n.d.]. However, the view of the authors is that because HRD dogs’ ability to detect and track odour is established on scientific evidence, it is not enough if the method and the hypothesis behind the method are not explained and supported by the scientific literature.

The present contribution is a PRISMA systematic review of the literature on the forensic use of HRD dogs. This systematic review of the literature examines the types of information provided by the researchers regarding HRD dog-and-handler teams to answer the following objectives: 1. Assess the sufficiency of the provided background information for repeatability; 2. Evaluate the ability of HRD dogs to detect residual scent; and 3. Summarize potential gaps in the literature and future studies. To complete the first objective, this study will progress from Martin and colleagues [2020] and Dargan and Forbes [2021] by taking a relatively more holistic approach by reviewing several variables regarding the selection and training of HRD dogs, as well as the results of the relevant studies. The intention of the second objective is to inform relevant stakeholders on whether there is sufficient evidence of HRD dog-and-handler teams to locate the residual odour of human remains. Residual odour refers to the scent detected by the canines that cannot be corroborated through other means of detection. Such evidence was used in the 2019 Redwine trial, where the prosecution submitted HRD dogs’ alerts as evidence of the presence of the residual odour of human remains [People of the State of Colorado v. Mark Allen Redwine, 17CR343 (2019), n.d.]. The defence challenged its scientific reliability, and although the court acknowledged the lack of scientific reliability, it eventually accepted the evidence as experience-based rather than science-based [People of the State of Colorado v. Mark Allen Redwine, 17CR343 (2019), n.d.]. However, the view of the authors is that because HRD dogs’ ability to detect and track odour is established on scientific evidence, it is not enough if the method and the hypothesis behind the method are not explained and supported by the scientific literature.

Human burial sites form a unique class of archeological site. Local civilian populations tend to have strong emotional ties to historic cemeteries, and Native American cemeteries are given special protection under federal law. Standard operating procedures on most (if not all) government installations is to identify and protect (in situ) all known locations of human burials. The location of many cemeteries, however, is unknown due to a lack of recognizable visual cues such as grave markers. Because the sites must be investigated without excavation, archaeologists have traditionally used geophysical survey as a noninvasive technique to locate lost cemeteries. A recent development in noninvasive grave location techniques is the use of Historic Human Remains Detection (HHRD) dogs. These dogs are specially trained to detect the scent of buried human bones. Proponents of this techniques claim the dogs can differentiate between human and animal bones and can detect graves exceeding 100 years of age and located up to 6 feet beneath the surface. Determining the effectiveness of HHRD dog surveys is problematic because ground truthing is rarely allowed. This report describes a scientific study testing the effectiveness of HHRD dogs and comparing HHRD dog results against geophysical survey results at multiple, unmarked, burial sites.