Enh. It reads like a brochure for a timeshare.
Having watched a lot of COPS, my impression is that police canines are just as much a scam as they are a real tool. It seems far too easy for the handler to prompt the dog's trigger response whenever "needed".
On COPS, it seems to go something like this:
I know there's drugs in the car, but the driver won't consent to a search. Better call in the K9 unit.
"Oh, look, the dog says there's drugs in the car. That's probable cause, and now I don't need your consent to search."
Of course, COPS only shows the hits, which is good for my justice boner, but probably not as good for actual justice.
Yes, it does have that easy to read point form type of presentation but the important part is where they say they back up the dog's positives with laboratory testing.
20 years ago the house next to me was burned out. There was an arsonist running around one who started with dumpsters, moved on to garages then, vacant houses and had apparently started on houses that looked like they were in disrepair.
There were people living in the house, luckily they weren't home at the time of the fire and if the roar of the fire hadn't woken me up, we would have been burned out too as there was only 20 feet between the houses and I managed to get a garden hose on our house for the 8 minutes it took for the fire department to arrive.
Cool story bro ?
Reason I telling it is because, the following day the fire investigator showed up, went right to the spot where the fire started, brought out this little machine and detected hydrocarbons. It was interesting because under the rubble that was previously the sundeck above the spot, there was the remains of an old sofa one that most likely had a synthetic covering.
The cops and fire department knew who they guy was, they just couldn't prove anything. Yes, they videoed everyone standing around watching the fires burn and they even identified a person of interest by doing that but that guy's story involved him being unemployed, having a police scanner on his bicycle and going to fire scenes "out of interest"
Dude never used accelerate, always made fires with materials on hand and justified having a lighter by flashing the pack of cigarettes he kept on him and the fire investigator stated that an old dry sofa and the empty cardboard boxes under the sundeck would be an excellent place to start a fire and the speed with which the fire tore through all three stories of the house was typical.
Point is, of course, there's always laboratory analysis after the dog and in this case, unlike COPs, the evidence only points towards a crime having been committed, not who might have committed it.
Were the clothes that Joly was wearing, the ones that showed traces of gasoline, the same ones he wore to mow the lawn ? Seems to me that if they were then there's be an explanation for the presence of an accelerant however if he changed his clothes before going in to do activist work, and it's those new clothes that tested positive, then it's rather suspicious.
Somebody burned two dogs and three cats alive, just think of what that must have sounded like and asking me to believe that there was a strange suspicious person in the house while Joly was there with two German Shepards is a bit of a stretch, to put it mildly.
