My own feeling is that it is wrong to dismiss this type of story as being irrelevant to science. I would at least venture an explanation in terms of the detective's ability, perhaps, to recognize, instinctively, that she was talking to a man who was concealing the truth. The short answer is that my instincts tell me this is not rubbish. Some of us are much better than others but instinctive intelligence, in a clearly defineable form, often appears to emerge only when it is genuinely called for. It can be observed - but generally not under laboratory conditions.
Anecdotal evidence is impossible to verify.
Correction - it is not easy to verify. It is unreliable only if we are willing to permit it to be unreliable and, if it could be useful and informative, then that is a mistake. Taken individually, accounts of unusual events have little significance but, properly investigated, verified and then grouped together, like with like, a pattern emerges. From my own experience, certain rather radical and scientifically unsupported ideas have taken seed and become personal beliefs. She stroked his head for a few moments then she told her son to phone the vet and to tell him that the dog was bleeding internally.