Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.

[imustpointout]

Interesting that people are willing to accept what The Times says at face value!

[Lyall]

as I said earlier - it is history and doesn't bother me.

We know it doesn't bother a lot of people. But what if someone is identified from these efits and is found to have been involved in the disappearance. I think it would bother you then, so why not now?

[Apostate]

Interesting that people are willing to accept what The Times says at face value!

No doubt the Times will be waiting for Carter-Ruck's letter with bated breath.

[carlymichelle]

Any why when their own paid detectives trashed one of their abductor sightings did they still continue to peddle it for years, choosing it over another sighting?

5 years wasted. Incredible.

poor little maddie the mcanns didnt care about her welfare and GA did and yet he   got all the crap laid on him it  does not make sense to me

[Lyall]

Interesting that people are willing to accept what The Times says at face value!

It only says what people were asking after Crimewatch - how can those efits have been sitting in a filing cabinet for five years unused.

Most of the press stayed loyal after Crimewatch. No surprise there, but you can bet they were all asking the same question in private, even if not in their papers.

[AnneGuedes]

Interesting that people are willing to accept what The Times says at face value!

There was some expectation when Halligen was arrested, after having be dismissed by Mr Kennedy, that he would give an account of eventual uncovered evidence. All was said is that they hired a McCann lookalike family as a trap for the abductor.
Nevertheless  crooks know a lot about crookery, I suppose.

[imustpointout]

We know it doesn't bother a lot of people. But what if someone is identified from these efits and is found to have been involved in the disappearance. I think it would bother you then, so why not now?

Then the blame will fall fairly and squarely on the PJ for not investigating the Smith sighting fully at the appropriate time.

Since when did it become the norm for victims of a crime (yes I know that Madeleine is the main victim) to have to do their own investigation and produce their own efits?

Since when is it the norm for Police to shut down a missing child investigation so quickly?

[Apostate]

Really sad when you think how much time they've spent on the gypsy nonsense but they couldn't even give the e-fits to the papers 5 years ago. 5 years wasted poor Maddie never had a chance. Incredibly sad.

[stephen25000]

Then the blame will fall fairly and squarely on the PJ for not investigating the Smith sighting fully at the appropriate time.

Since when did it become the norm for victims of a crime (yes I know that Madeleine is the main victim) to have to do their own investigation and produce their own efits?

Since when is it the norm for Police to shut down a missing child investigation so quickly?

Since when did it help to withhold, what could be vital evidence ?

[AnneGuedes]

It only says what people were asking after Crimewatch - how can those efits have been sitting in a filing cabinet for five years unused.

Most of the press stayed loyal after Crimewatch. No surprise there, but you can bet they were all asking the same question in private, even if not in their papers.

But wouldn't they have kept them in a drawer because in fact not much could be done with such almost contradictory e-fits ? If they had made e-fits representing Smithman with the little girl on his shoulder, wouldn't that have been more striking ?
The mystery, imo, is that SY exhibits these e-fits instead of trying to do a better job with the Smith family.

[Apostate]

Since when did it become the norm for victims of a crime (yes I know that Madeleine is the main victim) to have to do their own investigation and produce their own efits?

Since when did it become the norm to hire someone to do a job then dispense with their work? Work which 5 years later seems to be Operation's Grange only lead. Baffling.

[Luz]

Then the blame will fall fairly and squarely on the PJ for not investigating the Smith sighting fully at the appropriate time.

Since when did it become the norm for victims of a crime (yes I know that Madeleine is the main victim) to have to do their own investigation and produce their own efits?

Since when is it the norm for Police to shut down a missing child investigation so quickly?

Are you for real?!
If it is true that the e-fits presented in Crimewatch as being recovered from the McCann PI files were in fact suppressed for 5 years, under menace of legal prosecution, it's clear the level of obstruction that the McCann put into the investigation for their daughter.

What could the police do if they were not cooperating, on the contrary, and no help was given by the UK authorities?

If you have a daughter "abducted" you suppress important information that could help find her, for 5 years?

[imustpointout]

Since when did it help to withhold, what could be vital evidence ?

why did the PJ suppress vital evidence?

[imustpointout]

Are you for real?!
If it is true that the e-fits presented in Crimewatch as being recovered from the McCann PI files were in fact suppressed for 5 years, under menace of legal prosecution, it's clear the level of obstruction that the McCann put into the investigation for their daughter.

What could the police do if they were not cooperating, on the contrary, and no help was given by the UK authorities?

If you have a daughter "abducted" you suppress important information that could help find her, for 5 years?

yes I am for real

[Lyall]

Then the blame will fall fairly and squarely on the PJ for not investigating the Smith sighting fully at the appropriate time.

Since when did it become the norm for victims of a crime (yes I know that Madeleine is the main victim) to have to do their own investigation and produce their own efits?

Since when is it the norm for Police to shut down a missing child investigation so quickly?

Those are different issues. In 2008 on the forums we didn't know about these efits of course, but we knew the McCanns were ignoring the 10pm sighting. They finally mentioned it in Cutting Edge in May 2009, but we knew they had met (or their benefactor had met) the Smiths long before that programme, and they still ignored the sighting publicly afterwards. It was fishy then, and a good deal more fishy now. You ought to be as concerned about this as we are.