The options for Smithman carrying a girl urgently toward the DocLuz facility :Trouble with this is that Smithman was walking at normal pace.
1. MM needing urgent treatment for an overdose of drugs
2. MM needing urgent treatment for some injury
3. Smithman talking his own daughter needing urgent treatment for some injury.
4. Smithman talking his own daughter needing urgent treatment following a hit and run accident.
Trouble with this is that Smithman was walking at normal pace.
Not in the statement I just read "— The individual's gait was normal, between a fast walk and a run. He did not look tired, moving in a manner usual when one carries a child." 1611 to 1614 Witness testimony of Aoife Smith taken 2007/05/26Try the Portuguese version. Aoife said his speed was normal, and that she could tell that from fast to a run.
Try the Portuguese version. Aoife said his speed was normal, and that she could tell that from fast to a run.I can't read Portuguese sorry.
Try the Portuguese version. Aoife said his speed was normal, and that she could tell that from fast to a run.Could you write the sentence in Portuguese please?
I agree. According to the Smiths he was walking normally with his daughter held against his shoulder. The only slightly odd behaviour was his refusal to acknowledge the Smiths and Mrs Smith in particular and the way he looked down when passing them.
Had Smithman been up to no good however I don't think he would have gone anywhere near the Smith group. Given there were nine of them including several children they must have been heard before they were seen giving Smithman the opportunity to veer off.
Smithman could be yet another red herring?
I agree. According to the Smiths he was walking normally with his daughter held against his shoulder. The only slightly odd behaviour was his refusal to acknowledge the Smiths and Mrs Smith in particular and the way he looked down when passing them.
Had Smithman been up to no good however I don't think he would have gone anywhere near the Smith group. Given there were nine of them including several children they must have been heard before they were seen giving Smithman the opportunity to veer off.
Smithman could be yet another red herring?
Smithman was only relevant for who he wasn't, not for who he was. IMO.
I don't think they would have been particularly noisy, John. They were split up.
Peter and his family were walking ahead - his children were aged 13 and 6 and his nieces aged 10 and 4; his wife was feeling unwell and there is no suggestion the children were running about playing.
His parents were walking a distance behind and Aoife was walking on her own behind them.
I don't think it is particularly odd that he did not acknowledge Mrs Smith's greeting. If he was an English speaker, he may have thought she was making a statement of the obvious; his brisk gait indicated he was anxious to reach his destination.
He may not have heard or may not have realised the comment was directed at him.
He may not have understood if English was not his first language. Or he may have just been one of those people who do not acknowledge a stranger's greeting.
Neither do I attach any significance to him looking down as noted by Mr Smith. He may not have been 'hiding' his features. He was walking downhill carrying a burden, it makes sense every so often to look down to check one's footing.
I tend to agree that smithman is indeed a red herring.
One thing which does puzzle me is why the thirteen year old was interviewed in Eire but while the twelve year old returned to Luz to participate in the family reconstruction of events, he did not.
Father, son, daughter went. The 13 year was not a blood-related Smith.
*snipped* from Aoife's statement.
"When they arrived at the apartment they met her brother, Peter Smith, her sister-in-law, S.McD.Smith, her nephew (six years old), CO** and the son of her sister-in-law, TA*** (13 years old)"
When someone is walking down a hill towards you, wouldn't you be more aware of their footwear than their face?
6-Processos, Volume VI, pgs. 1611 to 1614Thanks for that Misty. I looked at the Portuguese and I had no idea which bit related to the manner of walking.
06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1613
Date of Diligence: 2007.05.26 10h45
Location: This Department
Name: Aoife Smith
*snipped*
"O caminhar do individuo era normal, sabendo distinguir o mesmo entre o andar apressado e o correr. O mesmo nao aparentava cansaco, deslocando-se de forma normal quando se leva uma crianca ao colo."
There were 9 witnesses. If you had a friend with you they may remember the male dog walker was wearing a white coat and you may go yes I remember that now etc...etc....There was only one person they saw on that short journey.
Adds further that his son TA*** was questioned in Ireland and said that the individual was dressed in a long-sleeved coat/jacket, black in colour, and that the child was barefoot. (Peter Smith 26 May 2007)
I wonder why he had to tell the lead investigating authority the content of his son's interview with the guards. It seems there may have been a break in the chain of evidence somewhere along the line if they weren't already in possession of that information.what is this about? Can you give me a link please?
I wonder why he had to tell the lead investigating authority the content of his son's interview with the guards. It seems there may have been a break in the chain of evidence somewhere along the line if they weren't already in possession of that information.
I agree. According to the Smiths he was walking normally with his daughter held against his shoulder. The only slightly odd behaviour was his refusal to acknowledge the Smiths and Mrs Smith in particular and the way he looked down when passing them... (snip)The obvious answer to why this man did not respond to Mrs S's question is that she asked it in a foreign language which he did not understand. If she had asked in Portuguese she would have got an answer IMO.
Try walking down Drogheda High St at night and asking a passing stranger "aahh ela está dormindo?".Why would you need to ask that?
Why would you need to ask that?One of the Smiths asked that question of a passing stranger in Portugal, in a foreign language Robbity.
" Aahh she's sleeping ? "
It seems more a statement rather than a question.
One of the Smiths asked that question of a passing stranger in Portugal, in a foreign language Robbity.Why would they ask a passing stranger if their child was sleeping? Unless they were in conversation, how
It is not surprising she did not get a reply.
One of the Smiths asked that question of a passing stranger in Portugal, in a foreign language Robbity.Do you have a cite for that?
It is not surprising she did not get a reply.
Do you have a cite for that?For a portuguese person to not understand english is perfectly reasonable, it is not ignorance.
Either the passing stranger was ignorant of English, or the passing stranger had some degree of involvement.
It would be interesting to know which.
For a portuguese person to not understand english is perfectly reasonable, it is not ignorance.After a mandatory 8 years of English in school, to not understand "is she sleeping" is ignorance.
One of the Smiths asked that question of a passing stranger in Portugal, in a foreign language Robbity.Yes I see what you mean now. So that phrase is recorded in the statement. Is this the section you are talking about "— Questioned, says that the individual did not speak nor did the child as she was in a deep sleep. " I doesn't say what language that was used. The Smith's may have been able to speak Portuguese.
It is not surprising she did not get a reply.
Yes I see what you mean now. So that phrase is recorded in the statement. Is this the section you are talking about "— Questioned, says that the individual did not speak nor did the child as she was in a deep sleep. " I doesn't say what language that was used. The Smith's may have been able to speak Portuguese.You could send your statistics theory to a professional journal Robbity, some articles get accepted, some rejected, there are two possibilities, so you have a very good 50% chance.
There is an interesting combination of options here. Smiths may or may not speak Portuguese and the man may of may not speak Portuguese. 4 variations are possible 50% of them should have been understood.
You could send your statistics theory to a professional journal Robbity, some articles get accepted, some rejected, there are two possibilities, so you have a very good 50% chance.Well that changes the probable outcomes again unless they just knew that one phrase. Which is rather unlikely. I know when I was in Italy the locals loved it when you spoke their language so you'd always say Good day in Italian but that was it.
BTW all 3 witnesses on 26th May stated that they did not understand portuguese.
Well that changes the probable outcomes again unless they just knew that one phrase. Which is rather unlikely. I know when I was in Italy the locals loved it when you spoke their language so you'd always say Good day in Italian but that was it.Speaking english she asked something like "is she asleep?" Robbity (source is a news article).
By the time I'm finished it will be 100% certain the article will get accepted.
That's certainly one possibility, the other being he didn't want to be recognised by a distinctive accent if he was an English speaker.The man (seen by smiths) took no measures to prevent his own height, build, skin colour, hair length, hair colour, clothing and shoes being seen. And he took no measures to prevent the child's height, skin colour, hair length, hair colour, clothes, and absence of footwear being seen. So if he was an abductor (or a body-mover) he was an incredibly stupid one who was unlikely to have the intelligence to even think about the far smaller risk of recognition by accent.
After a mandatory 8 years of English in school, to not understand "is she sleeping" is ignorance.Was 8 years of learning english mandatory in Portugal in the 1980's Shining when Smithman went to school?
The point is significant. Do you have a cite?
Was 8 years of learning english mandatory in Portugal in the 1980's Shining when Smithman went to school?I haven't researched this topic thoroughly, but we have been told by Portuguese people this should apply to anyone under about 60.
Also Smithman might have migrated to Portugal from Brazil, Spain, France, Italy or another country, after leaving school.
And please excuse the nosiness, how fluent have you become in portuguese Shining?
I haven't researched this topic thoroughly, but we have been told by Portuguese people this should apply to anyone under about 60.
I am not fluent in Portuguese, because everyone here speaks English. Shops, the bank, car hire/repair, the gardener, the cleaner, the pool man, repair men, hair stylists, the GNR ... I'm hoping that when we move to Portelas, which is a bit more rural, there will be a few folk who can't speak English, so I will pick up a bit of Portuguese.
By the way, is there a source for 'Smithman had his head turned down' or 'Smithman did not speak when spoken to'? I'm not seeing either in the statements, so I presume these points arose in the media.
YesThank you. I have seen this before but it is always good to refresh one's memory.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html
About half way down are a couple media stories
(snip) ... everyone here speaks English .... (snip) ... the GNR ... (snip)
(snip) ... everyone here speaks English .... (snip) ... the GNR ... (snip)
(snip) ... everyone here speaks English .... (snip)"at the 24 hour reception where some men tried to speak to some Portuguese employees in the attempt to make a phone call, but communication became complicated because the employee did not speak English"
"at the 24 hour reception where some men tried to speak to some Portuguese employees in the attempt to make a phone call, but communication became complicated because the employee did not speak English"Don't have a problem with the first 2 - GNR - even though on each occasion we have had dealings with the GNR and the bombeiros they all spoke fluent English.
Source: Statement of witness Carpenter, Cartas Rogatorias vol 3 p31-56.
Thank you. I have seen this before but it is always good to refresh one's memory.
As to K & G, this looks to me like a 100% normal way of getting off an aircraft with a small child. Perhaps Mr Smith thought Smithman should have lobbed the child over one shoulder - fireman style?
But have a look at what Kate is wearing - lower half. Shouldn't those be evidence?
I haven't researched this topic thoroughly, but we have been told by Portuguese people this should apply to anyone under about 60.
I am not fluent in Portuguese, because everyone here speaks English. Shops, the bank, car hire/repair, the gardener, the cleaner, the pool man, repair men, hair stylists, the GNR ... I'm hoping that when we move to Portelas, which is a bit more rural, there will be a few folk who can't speak English, so I will pick up a bit of Portuguese.
By the way, is there a source for 'Smithman had his head turned down' or 'Smithman did not speak when spoken to'? I'm not seeing either in the statements, so I presume these points arose in the media.
Was Smithman's interaction with the Smith family suspicious?
According to the Smith family, their encounter with Smithman was fleeting to say the least. Mrs Smith for her part was close enough to the stranger to offer a passing greeting in the form of a question as to whether the child was sleeping. She received no response whatsoever. For his part, Mr Martin Smith observed that the stranger lowered his head as they passed him in what one can only surmise was an attempt to hide his face. Son Peter Smith on the other hand stated in his statement that the individual did not try to hide his face or lower his look, doing nothing that could be perceived as strange.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p6p1615
41
The man's reaction was indicative of the way someone who had something suspicious to hide might react.
On the other hand, plenty (with nothing suspicious to hide) might have reacted the same way.
Are you discounting Smithman as a suspect?Suspected of doing what?
Suspected of doing what?
Are you discounting Smithman as a suspect?
(snip) ... On the other hand, plenty (with nothing suspicious to hide) might have reacted the same way.Agreed.
Agreed.If we were to ever get a name of the Smithman character I think then we could decide whether he has anything to do with the case, otherwise your opinion seems a little premature.
The only supposedly suspicious thing he did was not answering a question posed to him in a foreign language by a passing stranger .
Smithman has nothing at all to do with the case IMO.
... they don't exist.Only in solved cases maybe
IMO no-one has posted a case with open visible carrying through the streets for 400m or more.
I'm slightly peeved you've dismissed the Newcastle case so readily.If you had placed the PDL irish witnesses 400m away along the escape route in the case you cited, they would not have seen open carrying - they would have seen someone driving a car
If you had placed the PDL irish witnesses 400m away along the escape route in the case you cited, they would not have seen open carrying - they would have seen someone driving a carHow did you work that out?
If you had placed the PDL irish witnesses 400m away along the escape route in the case you cited, they would not have seen open carrying - they would have seen someone driving a car
If you had placed the PDL irish witnesses 400m away along the escape route in the case you cited, they would not have seen open carrying - they would have seen someone driving a car
The man (seen by smiths) took no measures to prevent his own height, build, skin colour, hair length, hair colour, clothing and shoes being seen. And he took no measures to prevent the child's height, skin colour, hair length, hair colour, clothes, and absence of footwear being seen. So if he was an abductor (or a body-mover) he was an incredibly stupid one who was unlikely to have the intelligence to even think about the far smaller risk of recognition by accent.
IMO all sightings where a visible child was being carried can be automatically ruled out as irrelevant.
Well, all that is true but, many children are abducted in broad daylight, parks and shopping malls, abductors just walk them away...I tend to think of the Smithman as a person who was caring for Madeleine and hence had no need to hide or disguise himself, but then got caught up in the cover-up unwittingly and hence should be offered an amnesty.
The obvious answer to why this man did not respond to Mrs S's question is that she asked it in a foreign language which he did not understand. If she had asked in Portuguese she would have got an answer IMO.What are the actual words in the Smith's statement that refers to this question please?
Speaking english she asked something like "is she asleep?" Robbity (source is a news article).it would important for accuracy to know the article for I read the statement in a completely different way.
The fact that the man did not reply is an almost certain indication that he did not understand english.
It's not rocket science.
"He remembers having seen the McCann couple once, near to the door of the apartment. He did not have any dialogue with them as he does not speak English."This the GNR policeman not talking to Jane Tanner as he "does not speak English well"
Source: Statement of GNR officer Morais, Processos V, p1333-1334
As regards the witness who alleged to have seen an individual carrying a child, whose (the witness) name he cannot remember, he says that upon learning of this situation, she stood next to two soldiers, awaiting the arrival of police officers. He did not speak to her as he does not speak English well.
Mr Martin Smith stated such in one of his statements...In the original statements was there anything about lookin down? I didn't see it.
Snip
In relation to the video clips of Gerard McCann and the person I saw on 3rd May 2007 when I saw the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007 something struck me that it could have been the same person.
It wasIn relation to the video clips of Gerard McCann and the person I saw on 3rd May 2007 when I saw the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007 something struck me that it could have been the same person.
It was the way Gerard McCann turned his head down which was similar to what the individual did on 3rd May 2007 when we met him.
It may have been the way he was carrying the child either.
I would be 60-80% sure that it was Gerard McCann that I met that night carrying a child.
I am basing that on his mannerism in the way he carried the child off the plane.
After seeing the BBC news at 10 PM, footage on the 9th September 2007 I contacted Leicestershire police with this information. During that time I spoke to all my family members who were with me on the night of 3rd May 2007 about this and the only one who felt the same way as me was my wife. She had seen the video clip of Gerard McCann walking down the stairs of the plane earlier that day.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P16/16_VOLUME_XVIa_Page_4136.jpg
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm
Agreed.This has not been established.
The only supposedly suspicious thing he did was not answering a question posed to him in a foreign language by a passing stranger .
Smithman has nothing at all to do with the case IMO.
In the original statements was there anything about lookin down? I didn't see it.
When we saw him. Of course the family had a private meeting about the sighting before he did his second statement. Others of course remember him turning his head down when passing them.So that too does not confirm that they mentioned the looking down in the original statements but only introduce the idea after seeing Gerry disembark the plane. Even if they all agree later it makes no difference. It smacks of collusion.
"During that time I spoke to all my family members who were with me on the night of 3rd May 2007." MS
So that too does not confirm that they mentioned the looking down in the original statements but only introduce the idea after seeing Gerry disembark the plane. Even if they all agree later it makes no difference. It smacks of collusion.
Not if he didn't remember and forgot to mention it at the time. Aoife said he couldn't remember what he looked liked at the time. That can change. MS is a very decent person according to local police.I feel I'm still right. There was nothing about "looking down" in the original statements and he (MS) tried to pin it on Gerry (with collusion). I would have preferred to look at the evidence myself to really be sure of it, but I couldn't find any initial statement that said Smithman "looked down".
If you had placed the PDL irish witnesses 400m away along the escape route in the case you cited, they would not have seen open carrying - they would have seen someone driving a car
I feel I'm still right. There was nothing about "looking down" in the original statements and he (MS) tried to pin it on Gerry (with collusion). I would have preferred to look at the evidence myself to really be sure of it, but I couldn't find any initial statement that said Smithman "looked down".
Speaking from his home in Drogheda, Co. Louth, Mr Smith recalled ....http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic8768.html Thanks John much appreciated.
3 January 2008
Maddie: Irishman provides dramatic new clues Daily Mail (appeared in paper edition only)
I feel I'm still right. There was nothing about "looking down" in the original statements and he (MS) tried to pin it on Gerry (with collusion). I would have preferred to look at the evidence myself to really be sure of it, but I couldn't find any initial statement that said Smithman "looked down".
Please do not use the word collusion again in this respect.If they all discuss what they remember and what they are going to say is that collusion? So it it has both positive and negative aspects to the word. If they admit to working as a family team (all nine of them) I think we are allowed to say "collusion".
If they all discuss what they remember and what they are going to say is that collusion? So it it has both positive and negative aspects to the word. If they admit to working as a family team (all nine of them) I think we are allowed to say "collusion".
OK in the dictionary online the negative aspects dominate but to me it has the additional definition something like cooperation. "collusion If you are making secret agreements with someone, then you are in collusion with them." It doesn't have to be bad, it could be for the better.
Collusion implies nefarious intent, find another word.Does anyone know the word for a planned family or group announcement, a joint statement? Like the Tapas 9 got together and drew up a timeline, was that "collusion"? If not what is the right word for it?
Consensus view?What about collaboration? I don't like "consensus" for it seems to imply we know the process.