Margaret Fleming carer told police sniffer dogs would not find her scent

One of the carers of missing woman Margaret Fleming claimed that a police sniffer dog would not be able to find her scent.

Constable Kimberley Hill, a dog handler, was giving evidence at the trial of Edward Cairney, 77, and Avril Jones, 58, who deny murdering Margaret, when she was 19, at the home they shared at Seacroft, Main Road, Inverkip, between December 18, 1999 and January 5, 2000.

She told prosecutor Iain McSporran QC that she arrived at Seacroft at 8.30pm on October 28, 2016 and with her she had two German Shepherds, Roxy and Herbie, and a cocker spaniel named Bo.

Constable Hill told the High Court in Glasgow that she spoke to Cairney and Jones to try to get as much information about Margaret.

She added: “We had a vulnerable person with learning difficulties and we were concerned for her .”

Mr McSporran asked: “What did you tell Mr Cairney and Miss Jones,” and the police officer replied: “I explained how a dog search works and the information I required.

"I had been informed Margaret made off through the back of the house by divisional officers.

“Mr Cairney said the dog won't find any scent.

"He said she might have gone round the back and swung out onto the main road.”

Mr McSporran said: “His first instinct was to say the dog wouldn't find any scent,” and she replied: “Yes.”

Constable Hill said that she was told Margaret had been wearing a tartan fleece, jeans and builders' boots that night.

She added: “Mr Cairney said she was about 5ft 4in and had a bigger build than me and had dark shoulder length hair.”

Mr McSporran said: “Did Mr Cairney or Miss Jones say where she might have gone,” and she replied: “Mr Cairney said Wemyss Bay.

"I asked if she would have gone on foot. He thought about it and said: 'No, she sometimes gets picked up by travellers.'

“Miss Jones said it had been drummed into Margaret by her grandmother from a young age if the police got her they would take her away.

"There was a comment that if I found her she might be violent because I am a uniformed officer.”

The court heard that Constable Hill asked if Margaret had a mobile phone and was told she did, but neither Cairney nor Jones knew the number,

Under cross examination by defence QC Thomas Ross, representing Cairney, Constable Hill admitted that there was only a limited time period for dogs to pick up scent.

Mr Ross said: “If Margaret had walked along a hard surface the scent would be gone by the time you got there,” and Constable Hill replied: “Yes.”

The court was told that the maximum time for scent to linger on grassy areas was about two hours.

The defence QC said: “There are some indications this happened at 5.40pm and you did not get there until 8.30pm, so Mr Cairney might have been correct when he said the dogs' chances of getting her was low,” and the police officer replied: “That's correct.”

Cairney and Jones deny murdering Margaret by means unknown.

They also deny claiming £182,000 in benefits fraud by pretending she was alive.

The trial before Lord Matthews continues.