Justice 4 ALL Madeleine McCann Family
You need to be a member of this forum in order to view its entire contents.
We welcome applications to join the forum from genuine caring compassionate people that wish to support Mr Mrs McCann in their never ending resolve to finding their daughter Madeleine and bringing her back home where she truly belongs.

All applicants are checked out so people with no sense, no moral compass, no rationality and only half a brain cell and even less grip on reality and who are devoid of all logic - need NOT apply!
This also applies to ex-members, who no longer want to be members, yet spend their lives viewing this forum and telling people they no longer want to be members.
This is said without prejudice with no one in particular in mind.

Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Page 3 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Rosie

Post by dianeh on Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:22 am

Why didnt Amoral take the dogs to the beach? IMO because he knew there was no body at the beach. IMO, he knew there was no body at all. This again raises your point of what did the dogs smell in the car. Was it simply roadkill or was there nothing there at all? Or was there something more sinister going on to influence the dogs indications.

Why didnt Rebelo take the dogs to the beach? IMO because he believes that Madeleine was abducted and that there is no proof that she was killed during the abduction or in the immediate surrounds. Rosie, if Madeleine was buried in the sand at the beach, some pooch would have found her by now, or during the time she was allededly buried (20 days, a dog would find a 20 day body from a kilometre away). If Madeleine was killed and buried at the beach, it wouldnt be a beach in close proximity to people, where dogs walk,as the body would be found. In short, Rebelo knows there is no body on the beach because it would have been found if it had ever been there. And very clearly a body was not dug up from the beach after 20 days and put in the hire car, and Rebelo knows that.
avatar
dianeh
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3465
Age : 53
Location : Outback, Australia
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by Guest on Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:11 am

Katie Smith's blog is worth of reading once again:

http://katiesmith.wordpress.com/2008/09/08/canine-capers/

The Sun has edited original version very much, big question is why did Sun (like Martin Grimes) want to offer distorted information and manipulate public opinion?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by vee8 on Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:21 am

I have to say that, for the most part, the Sun has been very supportive of the McCann's, right from the start. It was the Daily Express who printed most of the distorted garbage, and they were the ones who ended up paying for it in court, or to be more precise, out of court. I don't know why the Sun edited it the way they did, unless it was supposed to show the moment the PJ decided to make the McCann's suspects. They may have had good intentions, but ended up fueling the anti-McCann Mars Bars conspiracy theories instead.
avatar
vee8
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3113
Location : suffolk
Registration date : 2008-06-24

http://www.madeleine-adestinybegun.co.uk

Back to top Go down

Hi Minnea

Post by Rosie on Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:24 am

The story that ran with the video in the Sun was very anti PJ and pro McCann, so I too wondered why they edited that video like that?
The quote by the ex top detective bashed the PJ very hard too. (Not nearly as hard as they should be bashed though)

I wonder how close the PJ actually is to bringing in Goncalo Amaral for official questioning? His behaviour is highly suspect and after all, he made two people suspects on a lot lot less!

Amarsehole Ididn'tdoit

Vee said....

I have to say that, for the most part, the Sun has been very supportive of the McCann's, right from the start. It was the Daily Express who printed most of the distorted garbage, and they were the ones who ended up paying for it in court, or to be more precise, out of court. I don't know why the Sun edited it the way they did, unless it was supposed to show the moment the PJ decided to make the McCann's suspects. They may have had good intentions, but ended up fueling the anti-McCann Mars Bars conspiracy theories instead.

I bet when the Corrio De Manure's video clip emerged, they nearly choked on those Mars Bars gagging
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

More video footage.

Post by Shingle on Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:33 pm

There is a longer video here showing the complete screening of the cars.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5325618840960532263&hl=en

It clearly demonstrates that the dogs were directed during this screening.



Lets go back to the beginning.....Grimes shows the dog around the first three cars, taking a total of 43 seconds. He then comes across the Renault, complete with Madeleine stickers....none on the other cars.

So Grimes has a huge clue as to who's car this is.

He then spends 2 whole minutes banging on the car and repeatedly calling Eddie back to it. It can be seen that the dog is showing a keen interest 3 or 4 spaces down from the car...several times.

At one point Grimes is seen tapping the area of the boot, and the cameraman focusing on that area. Later Keela will alert in that area.....were they both psycic?

When Eddie finally alerts, Grimes then stays him. As they move away the dog begins to alert again in the area that he had previously shown interes in. Grimes quickly stays the dog.

Grimes himself says that the dog will only bark if he finds what he is trained to find.....so why did the dog bark in the area that he had shown interst in, and more to the point, why did Grimes stay the dog.

Shingle
Rookie
Rookie

Number of posts : 74
Registration date : 2008-05-23

Back to top Go down

Hi Shingle

Post by Rosie on Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:50 pm

EXACTLY, well said!

You have made a great post there and it clearly explains something very wrong here.

Hey "Rod" (Portuguese Police national director) When is Amaral going to be brought in for official questioning into his lousy investigation and into HIS knowledge of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?

In my very humble opinion, the sooner the better!

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Cadaver or caviar, it aint Madeleines body smells.....

Post by Guest on Mon Sep 15, 2008 11:05 pm

Looks like it found some dogp**s on the wheels to me. Probably from a female dog on heat. Oh for Gods' sake, how much longer do we have to put up with this rubbish. I reckon they know full well who has her and the dog has only sniffed out what I reckon was planted anyway. No convincing me that the Mccanns are guilty AT ALL.
Madeleine will turn up alive and well. The sooner the better.
God bless you little one.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Tee shirt.

Post by Shingle on Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:06 am

There is another discrepancy....in fact the case is full of them.

The dogs alerted to Madeleines tee shirt....FALSE....it was Seans tee shirt.

http//cache.daylife.com/imageserve/09989cTf6b4dB/610x.jpg

http//sosmaddie.dhblogs.be/archive/ ... ments.html


When they hold the tee shirt up, it is plainly Seans.



The dogs alerted to cuddlecat....FALSE....Grimes found cuddlecat, and held it up. In this video the dog sniffs at the cupboard with cuddlecat in it....which is open enough for anyone standing near the cupboard to see down into it.

The dog has no interest and moves away, he is then called back and on hind legs sniffs the top of the desk furthest away from the cupboard. He then starts to bark and Grimes immediately opens the cupboard and takes out cuddlecat.

Now how on earth can they say the dog reacted to cuddlecat. Watch the first of the two videos.


http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/

Shingle
Rookie
Rookie

Number of posts : 74
Registration date : 2008-05-23

Back to top Go down

Doggy doings.

Post by Shingle on Fri Sep 19, 2008 7:13 pm

I have still seen nothing from the antis to question the video of the dogs screening the evidence. Not one of them has questioned the way it was done, even though it is plain for all to see that the dogs were directed.

In the underground car park, the dog is seen sniffing the air in a spot three or four spaces down from the Renault. He is clearly excited by this place but the antis will tell you he is trying to find the source of the odour.

When he leaves the Renault, he barks in the same spot, and Grimes quickly stays him.

I am begining to think the dog got it right in the first place.....the odour was not on the car, but in the car park. In the case of the Renault, the dog was giving Grimes, what Grimes was clearly asking for.

Shingle
Rookie
Rookie

Number of posts : 74
Registration date : 2008-05-23

Back to top Go down

Dogs

Post by Guest on Fri Sep 19, 2008 8:42 pm

I still think there was absolutely NOTHING in/on the car to suggest that Madeleine had been put in there dead. I still believe that 'something' was smeared on the wheels and door edge by ******* ****** and *** cronies. I have never thought otherwise that this person has some involvement in Madeleines disappearance. Whats the betting that the one eyed cripple will be found dead somewhere? Was he a homeless vagrant? Nobody would even report the poor bugger missing. That is a very strange thing. This whole thing gets more like an Agatha Cristie novel as it unravels. The only consistencies in my mind are :

1. It is VERY evident on ALL the family photographs from a very early age, that Madeleine and her siblings are wanted and loved

2. THAT has not changed.

3. The Portugese Police were very sloppy by British standards, ie, fags on the go at the scene of her disappearance etc.

4. They didnt seem in any hurry to find her.

5. For some reason 'Mr. Columbo' keeps popping up and always in some distasteful manner. (Joannas' mum and Joannas disappearance for one very serious and good example.) Also, where is the book on Joannas disappearance !! Yeah.thought so...

6. Very unprofessional to write a book about a 'murder' case when there is no corpse or even evidence of one.

7. The dogs(I mean the sniffer dogs) do not convince me at all. As I say, could have been 'smeared' with something to excite the dogs ie a female dog on heats' urine would cause a lot of excitement in a dog of either gender. Interesting the way the dog was excited in the part of the car park where there was no car, did some of the 'plant' dribble or leak there I wonder. Interesting that nobody was interested in the fact that the dog WAS interested in that spot.

8. I say let the book come out, it might just nail the B**S***D once and for all. Whats that saying about 'rope'?

9. I agree with what Royal said. Very well put my friend.

10. I will continue to pray to GOD that the Mccanns will NEVER give up on this until the perpetrators are brought to justice.

Ididn'tdoit Bet you bloody well know who did mate !!!!

m

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Dogs.

Post by Shingle on Fri Sep 19, 2008 9:23 pm

I agree with you , m from m, It worries me about the timing too. Lardy had nothing....zilch a big fat zero, then 3 months after he had started the investigation, comes up with the idea of bringing in British dogs.

He had been offered this help early on in the enquiry, but refused. Now I wonder why British dogs?

Anyway hey presto, 100% DNA, blood, hair all sorts..........yea right. Some folks believe in fairies too.

You know I would dearly love to see those dogs work on a clean car, and Martin Grimes putting the same efoort into getting them to find something.

Shingle
Rookie
Rookie

Number of posts : 74
Registration date : 2008-05-23

Back to top Go down

Reply to Shingle

Post by Guest on Fri Sep 19, 2008 9:39 pm

Do you think they will EVER get to the bottom of it. Im starting to be very afraid for Madeleine.
I keep thinking of those poor kids at that childrens home and all the b's involved in that. What is happening to humanity. I cannot get to grips with all the evil. I pray constantly for Madeleine, and her parents and that little Joanna and others, but Madeleine is who I focus on most as there is more POWER to find her and whoever is involved because thank God the Mccanns do have good support, Brian Kennedy, Richard Branson, Vatican (for spiritual support) and I know they will NEVER EVER give up. God bless 'em.
Anyway, thanks fopr your response
Love m

ps on a lighter note now I am calming down a bit, can YOU do this ? >> moony

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by Tinkerbell43 on Sat Sep 20, 2008 2:38 am

I dont doubt these dogs are good but I cant get my head round this "scent of death". It has always been my understanding that the dogs are trained to find dead bodies or remains, not where dead bodies have been! Hence them being called victim RECOVERY dogs. Personally I think the poor dogs have lost some credibility as a result of this video, no wonder it would not stand up in court without any corroberating evidence.

Having watched the video in full a good number of times, the dog didnt even go near one side of the green van. Now I assume this was Murats van, where I read in the early days a mattress had been taken from. Why did Grimes not call Eddie back and make him go round this van as thoroughly as he did the Scenic and regardlessly, why was Keela not put inside all the vehicles or is Keela only used after Eddie has indicated ?. Surely not ?

Also, why was only Grimes wearing the correct attire, if the cameraman had been any bloody closer he would have been in the boot with Keela!.
avatar
Tinkerbell43
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 1473
Age : 53
Registration date : 2008-04-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by Rosie on Sat Sep 20, 2008 9:52 am

Hi All,

Shingle I tried to watch the links you gave but they both led nowhere. i would really like to watch them if you have the time to supply them again.


When we see Eddie smelling the air between the cars, he keep wanting to run off to the other little silver car, I think it is a Skoda Flavia, do we know who this car belonged to? Eddie seems far more interested in this car than any of the others.

I have questioned too why the PJ did not examine why this dog was more interested in running around in circles in that particular spot, if the odour was emanating from the car and it was that strong to pick it up there, why didn't Eddie trace it straight back to the Renault where it would have been at its strongest? Why did Eddie keep running off to the little Silver Skoda Flavia and paying more interest to that? Also once when Eddie run right off he looked like he was just going to start to indicate something at the Skoda and Grimes clapped his hands and called him back.

The T shirt is interesting in itself! Are we being asked to believe that the McCanns killed their daughter and then took her T shirt off and placed it with her other clothes and then dressed the child in her MISSING pyjamas? If they did this, then why has this supposed scent not contaminated everything else that it was with? Why only on the T shirt, which is not even Madeleine's T Shirt apparently it is Sean's!

When Eddie ran off (AGAIN) grimes can clearly be heard saying in a disappointed low voice "he's run off" and the PJ mutter something back to him, like call him back.
they spent approximate 43 secs on each car and when they came to the McCanns car Grimes kept the dog there for 1.43 secs about! Why? he know this was the car because he knew they drove the Renault and he saw Find Madeleine posters all over it!

How was Eddie trained? With the chemical that mimics cadverine? If so when did Grimes last train Eddie using this substance?
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by Rosie on Sat Sep 20, 2008 10:17 am

Tinkerbell43 wrote:I dont doubt these dogs are good but I cant get my head round this "scent of death". It has always been my understanding that the dogs are trained to find dead bodies or remains, not where dead bodies have been! Hence them being called victim RECOVERY dogs. Personally I think the poor dogs have lost some credibility as a result of this video, no wonder it would not stand up in court without any corroberating evidence.

Having watched the video in full a good number of times, the dog didnt even go near one side of the green van. Now I assume this was Murats van, where I read in the early days a mattress had been taken from. Why did Grimes not call Eddie back and make him go round this van as thoroughly as he did the Scenic and regardlessly, why was Keela not put inside all the vehicles or is Keela only used after Eddie has indicated ?. Surely not ?

Also, why was only Grimes wearing the correct attire, if the cameraman had been any bloody closer he would have been in the boot with Keela!.

I asked why it was that only Grimes was wearing the proper gear and also why he was wearing it in the car park and yet NOT in the apartment? The only thing he was wearing in the apartment was his gloves.

I think it is about time we had some answers from Grimes, his report as we are led to believe did not go anywhere near explaining this poor performance. Grimes appeared to anxious for Eddie and Keela to find something.
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Videos.

Post by Shingle on Sat Sep 20, 2008 8:12 pm

Rosie,

I have been searching for those videos, and guess what....they have disapeared. It would seem that they were released to show the world that the dogs did indeed find the evidence, they seem to have had the opposite effect and instead show how much the dogs were manipulated.

Shingle
Rookie
Rookie

Number of posts : 74
Registration date : 2008-05-23

Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by Guest on Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:08 am

Shingle wrote:Rosie,

I have been searching for those videos, and guess what....they have disapeared. It would seem that they were released to show the world that the dogs did indeed find the evidence, they seem to have had the opposite effect and instead show how much the dogs were manipulated.

You're so right and as you said those long videos have disappeared. I have understood most of them were on Duarte Levy's and Paulo Reis's site and they are both antis, so it is not surprising videos have disappeared. I wonder how blind these antis are, when they didn't realize how obviously Martin Grimes and PJ officers tried to stage Madeleine parents and these longer versions proved it, they concentrated only to Madeleine's parents car.

There is few longer versions still in You Tube

Like this one:

http://www.youtube.com/v/FTF4JTLeOWA

I use to copy all images I find, but I don't actually know how to copy videos. But I know here are many who know how to do that, so could you copy these longer versions.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by clairesy on Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:25 am

Minnea wrote:
Shingle wrote:Rosie,

I have been searching for those videos, and guess what....they have disapeared. It would seem that they were released to show the world that the dogs did indeed find the evidence, they seem to have had the opposite effect and instead show how much the dogs were manipulated.

You're so right and as you said those long videos have disappeared. I have understood most of them were on Duarte Levy's and Paulo Reis's site and they are both antis, so it is not surprising videos have disappeared. I wonder how blind these antis are, when they didn't realize how obviously Martin Grimes and PJ officers tried to stage Madeleine parents and these longer versions proved it, they concentrated only to Madeleine's parents car.

There is few longer versions still in You Tube

Like this one:

http://www.youtube.com/v/FTF4JTLeOWA

I use to copy all images I find, but I don't actually know how to copy videos. But I know here are many who know how to do that, so could you copy these longer versions.

Hi minnea,

You wondering how blind the antis are...Hmmmmmmmmm well to be honest im not sure it is their eyes that are causing the problem...more like their brains.LOLL.

Thanks for posting that link. Im not sure how to post videos on here at all.I know how to post pictures now but have only learnt to do that recently..LOLL Im a bit thick with pc's to be honest with you. But am getting a little itsy bit better as time goes on.

I wonder why those videos have disappeared to. Seams they thought they would release them only to get the public talking and finger pointing at the mccanns...but as it didn't work...they have gotten rid of them.I wonder whats next?

Take care minnea will catch up with ya in chat one day!!XX
avatar
clairesy
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 2698
Age : 32
Location : uk
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by May on Sun Sep 21, 2008 1:28 am

Hi
The longer video of the dogs is still on Duarte Levy's site.
http://sosmaddie.dhblogs.be/
I watched it for the first time yesterday and was shocked at how Eddie imo was manipulated. The wardrobe in particular he ran in and out of a number of times without barking only to be brought back time and time again. Why would Martin Grimes point Eddie to the wardrobe anyway? Seems a bit suss to me. May
avatar
May
Master
Master

Number of posts : 498
Registration date : 2008-07-27

Back to top Go down

Eddie.

Post by Shingle on Sun Sep 21, 2008 2:22 am

I have just watched Eddie finding the scent on Seans tee shirt again. Something has struck me as very wrong....Eddie is trained to stand and bark, Keela is trained to stand........Now just wondering, but when did Martin Grimes train them to throw items around that could be evidence....chew them and get doggy saliva on the, possibly destroying vital evidence......

Shingle
Rookie
Rookie

Number of posts : 74
Registration date : 2008-05-23

Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by Rosie on Sun Sep 21, 2008 3:39 am

Thanks for the video link May.

I have just watched it and Eddie ran in and out of that wardrobe many times before he gave a positive. After he had indicated a positive Eddie ran back in and out of the same wardrobe and all over the beds WITHOUT indicating a positive. Also it is still unclear just where Eddie is indicating, he does not seem to be indicated on the wardrobe or the bed or the floor, in my opinion he is pleasing his master 'Martin Grimes', there is nothing there at all and the DNA results actually corroborate that NOTHING was found.

Also the same story with the window, Eddie went there many times before he gave a positive reaction and Grimes had to force him back just before he gave the positive.

This dog is confused as to what he is supposed to be finding and the reason for his confusion in my opinion is Martin grimes himself, he is giving the dog mixed signals, where I believe usually this dog is allowed to get on and indicate when he finds a positive, on this occasion and on the occasion in the car park he is being forced to go back to places and objects he has already passed and this is confusing the animal.

Where does Grimes work out of, does anyone know? In view of how this NON evidence is being used to malign an innocent couple, I think an explanation of his handling of the dog and his report is required.

The people that keep on about this dog evidence and how great the PJ are should realise

  1. DNA has proved beyond reasonable doubt that no evidence that Madeleine has been harmed exists
  2. The PJ have not found any evidence at all to say that Madeleine has been harmed
  3. The Portuguese prosecutor has exonerated the McCanns.
  4. If there was any evidence the McCanns would not have been cleared.

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by littleminx on Sun Sep 21, 2008 8:08 am

thanks for the link may!! i just watched it and just could not believe that anyone could take the dog serious!! how many times did the dog go in and out of the wardrobe and jump on and off the bed b4 barking!! and even when he did bark it was more like the dog was playing not at all like it had found the scent of death/blood or wotever!! it makes me so angry that the anti,s take stuff like this as gospal/facts!! im almost positive my dog (rottweiler) could have gave the same performance if not better. :banghead: :banghead:
avatar
littleminx
Master
Master

Number of posts : 450
Age : 50
Location : west midlands
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by aimzcol on Sun Sep 21, 2008 8:53 am

i too have just watched that video and surley if the dog had found anything he would be barking in the same place instead of juping from place to place . almost like playin. do the pj even have proper police dogs as they dont know how to do there job properly in the first place .

:roll:
avatar
aimzcol
Newbie
Newbie

Number of posts : 12
Location : west midlands
Registration date : 2008-08-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by Guest on Sun Sep 21, 2008 9:36 am

Sorry to say this, but the dogs and their handler are a disgrace. If I was called upon as a jurist and had to consider that calibre of evidence, I would be spitting at the mouth and doing a Henry Fonda in that brilliant film that rips the whole farce apart.

Damned disgrace and I have lodged a formal complaint

flower

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Honestbroker

Post by Rosie on Tue Sep 23, 2008 2:24 am

Hi there, I did reply to you yesterday but due to the forum propblems experienced we seem to have lost about 10 posts!

Basically you said you were a bit confused about which dog was in the boot of the Renault?

I believe the Dog was Keela because of the following (sorry for the rushed post, feel free to yell at me if I forget something)

  • If you look at little Eddie, you will see his markings are on the top of his back.
  • Keela's are on the top of her back and travel down her flanks.
  • Look at the dog in the boot, you will clearly see this is Keela because of her distinctive markings.
  • If you listen carefully, you will also actually hear Grimes refer to the dog in the boot as 'Keela'
  • Eddie barks when indicating a positive
  • Keela sort of freezes and wags her little stumpy tail, the dog in the boot indicated like this.
  • When Eddie has finished running around the cars listen to what Grimes says
  • Grimes actually explains that the scent is coming through the seal, so he does NOT intend to put the dog (Eddie) inside the car.


You were having some difficulty viewing the Sun video? Have a look at this one it is the longer version of the video from the Correo de Maure (Portuguese newspaper)

Hope this helps. highfive



Last edited by Rosiepops on Wed Sep 24, 2008 11:27 am; edited 1 time in total

_________________
no way
Goncalo Amaral Your Time Is Nearly Up!


"RICARDO PAIVA SHOULD RESIGN, HIS POSITION IS UNTENABLE - IF HE DOES NOT RESIGN, THEN SACK HIM!
avatar
Rosie
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 4358
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Dog Evidence - Only An Indication - Experts

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum