The "secondary search" is the dog sniff. I'm pretty sure most dog handlers wont inform anyone what the dog's response is supposed to be to a positive hit on something. (the response was probably the dog sitting down or maybe barking. Most of the time it's a silent response like sitting) That's probably why they wouldnt tell the guy what the dog did. They dont want people to know what the animal responses are.

Dogs are not infallible anyways. I had my luggage searched when coming back from England because the dog indicated there was a problem. (nothing was there. Only thing I had that the dog could have hit on might have been the 20 pounds of Cadbury's chocolate I had. I had no problem with being searched as long as there wasnt any dog drool in my chocolate)


I dont understand why he wouldnt let them search the car. If he didnt have anything illegal in the car, why refuse? That just makes the police more suspicious. I'd have let them do the search. I dont see the harm in letting them do their job.