UK Justice Forum

Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Redblossom on October 27, 2013, 12:19:51 AM

Title: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 27, 2013, 12:19:51 AM
Readers should note that this article was pulled by the Sunday Times shortly after going to press and was replaced by a somewhat watered down version in The Times the following day.

On Sunday 29 December the Sunday Times printed a retraction and an apology for suggesting that the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years. They now claim that the e-fits were passed to police as early as October 2009 although they were created by Kevin Halligen and Oakley International in late 2007 or early 2008.

www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/regulars/corrections/article1357081.ece





Sunday Times - paper edition 27 October 2013

Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years

(http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/multimedia/dynamic/00380/STN2704PIC3_380277k.jpg)

             Madeleine disappeared from her parents holiday apartment in the
                       Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz on 3rd May 2007



THE critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.

The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.

It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard.

But the trail was left to go cold for five years because the McCanns and their advisers sidelined the report and threatened to sue its authors if they divulged the contents.

The report, seen by the Sunday Times, called for the E-Fits to be released immediately and said "anomalies" in statements by the McCanns and their friends must be resolved.

A source close to the McCanns said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if made public.

[Page 4]

The new prime suspect was first singled out by detectives in 2008. Their findings were suppressed. Insight reports

The team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by Kate and Gerry McCann to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine.

It was the spring of 2008, 10 months after the three-year-old had disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz, and the McCanns were beginning to despair over the handling of the local police investigation. They were relying on the new team to bring fresh hope.

But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public.

Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

They found that it contained new evidence about a key suspect seen carrying a child away from the McCanns’ holiday apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared.

This sighting is now considered the main lead in the investigation and E-Fits of the suspect, taken from the report, were the centrepiece of a Crimewatch appeal that attracted more than 2,400 calls from the public this month.

One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.

The team of investigators from the security firm Oakley International were hired by the McCanns’ Find Madeleine fund, which bankrolled private investigations into the girl’s disappearance. They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

Their report, seen by The Sunday Times, focused on a sighting by an Irish family of a man carrying a child at about 10pm on May 3, 2007, when Madeleine went missing.

An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.

Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund. A source close to the fund said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if it became public.

Oakley’s six-month investigation included placing undercover agents inside the Ocean Club where the family stayed, lie detector tests, covert surveillance and a forensic re-examination of all existing evidence.

It was immediately clear that two sightings of vital importance had been reported to the police. Two men were seen carrying children near the apartments between 9pm, when Madeleine was last seen by Gerry, and 10pm, when Kate discovered her missing.

The first man was seen at 9.15pm by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns, who had been dining with them at the tapas bar in the resort. She saw a man carrying a girl just yards from the apartment as she went to check on her children.

The second sighting was by Martin Smith and his family from Ireland, who saw a man carrying a child near the apartment just before 10pm.

The earlier Tanner sighting had always been treated as the most significant, but the Oakley team controversially poured cold water on her account.

Instead, they focused on the Smith sighting, travelling to Ireland to interview the family and produce E-Fits of the man they saw. Their report said the Smiths were “helpful and sincere” and concluded: “The Smith sighting is credible evidence of a sighting of Maddie and more credible than Jane Tanner’s sighting”. The evidence had been “neglected for too long” and an “overemphasis placed on Tanner”.

The new focus shifted the believed timeline of the abduction back by 45 minutes. The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised timeline should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.


"The report questioned 'anomalies' in the McCanns' statements"


The potential abductor seen by the Smiths is now the prime suspect in Scotland Yard’s investigation, after detectives established that the man seen earlier by Tanner was almost certainly a father carrying his child home from a nearby night creche. The Smith E-Fits were the centrepiece of the Crimewatch appeal.

Investigators had E-Fits five years ago

One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said.

The detailed images of the face of the man seen by the Smith family were never released by the McCanns. But an artist’s impression of the man seen earlier by Tanner was widely promoted, even though the face had to be left blank because she had only seen him fleetingly and from a distance.

Various others images of lone men spotted hanging around the resort at other times were also released.

Nor were the Smith E-Fits included in Kate McCann’s 2011 book, Madeleine, which contained a whole section on eight “key sightings” and identified those of the Smiths and Tanner as most “crucial”. Descriptions of all seven other sightings were accompanied by an E-Fit or artist’s impression. The Smiths’ were the only exception. So why was such a “crucial” piece of evidence kept under lock and key?

The relationship between the fund and Oakley was already souring by the time the report was submitted — and its findings could only have made matters worse.

As well as questioning parts of the McCanns’ evidence, it contained sensitive information about Madeleine’s sleeping patterns and raised the highly sensitive possibility that she could have died in an accident after leaving the apartment herself from one of two unsecured doors.

There was also an uncomfortable complication with Smith’s account. He had originally told the police that he had “recognised something” about the way Gerry McCann carried one of his children which reminded him of the man he had seen in Praia da Luz.

Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.

The McCanns were also understandably wary of Oakley after allegations that the chairman, Kevin Halligen, failed to pass on money paid by the fund to Exton’s team. Halligen denies this. He was later convicted of fraud in an unrelated case in the US.

The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.

He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.

“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.

A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.

It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”

Insight: Heidi Blake and Jonathan Calvert


http://www.mccannfiles.com/id285.html
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 12:34:53 AM
Let's hope the Porto PJ team will not read this. Not only they know when and how Smithman (the CW breaking news) was sighted, but there's a certain solidarity within the PJ, mainly when attacks come from abroad.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 12:36:50 AM
Sunday Times

(Preview)

Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years

The new prime suspect was first singled out by detectives in 2008. Their findings were suppressed. Insight reports

The Sunday Times Insight team Published: 27 October 2013

Madeleine disappeared from the Praia da Luz resort in May 2007 Madeleine disappeared from the Praia da Luz resort in May 2007 (Adrian Sheratt)

THE critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.

The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.

It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard.

A team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by the McCanns to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine.

[Full article by subscription only]


Is this connected to Halligen/Oakley Int/Red Defence etc etc?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id285.html
Yes it only can be the famous Halligen. But in September, proclaimed date of the e-fits, he had been sent to crook elsewhere.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 12:57:49 AM
Why would they keep it secret? And for 5 years?
Maybe they just  disqualified it because they believed Jane Tanner more.. I think this is what Scotland Yard said..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 27, 2013, 01:07:02 AM
Let's hope the Porto PJ team will not read this. Not only they know when and how Smithman (the CW breaking news) was sighted, but there's a certain solidarity within the PJ, mainly when attacks come from abroad.

what they gunna do anne if they do see it ...start a war  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 01:18:25 AM
Jesus Christ ..what a story!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:23:00 AM
Imustpointout 8((()*/ Thank you.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 01:24:41 AM
Jesus Christ ..what a story!

I can't believe they've published that ! 

Real  journalism is somehow shocking after all this time  ...  I don't  know what to say 


Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 01:26:16 AM
Imustpointout 8((()*/ Thank you.

I will be supplying my PayPal details (probably with a donate button) shortly.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 01:27:16 AM
What I am thinking now is that the ex spies can as well with no problems kidnap a child of high earning parents in a way to make money and later bid to find the child... not that I am thinking it happened in this case but it is a possibility..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:28:59 AM
I will be supplying my PayPal details (probably with a donate button) shortly.

8)-))) It's a growing trend.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 01:32:30 AM
Here is a bit more about the highly paid, picked up investigators


September 25, 2009

Mark Hollingsworth Investigates The McCann Files

Disillusioned with the Portuguese police, Gerry and Kate McCann turned to private detectives to find their missing daughter. Instead the efforts of the private eyes served only to scare off witnesses, waste funds and raise false hopes. Mark Hollingsworth investigates the investigators.

by Mark Hollingsworth

It was billed as a ‘significant development’ in the exhaustive search for Madeleine McCann. At a recent dramatic press conference in London, the lead private investigator David Edgar, a retired Cheshire detective inspector, brandished an E-FIT image of an Australian woman, described her as ‘a bit of a Victoria Beckham lookalike’, and appealed for help in tracing her. The woman was seen ‘looking agitated’ outside a restaurant in Barcelona three days after Madeleine’s disappearance. ‘It is a strong lead’, said Edgar, wearing a pin-stripe suit in front of a bank of cameras and microphones. ‘Madeleine could have been in Barcelona by that point. The fact the conversation took place near the marina could be significant.’

But within days reporters discovered that the private detectives had failed to make the most basic enquiries before announcing their potential breakthrough. Members of Edgar’s team who visited Barcelona had failed to speak to anyone working at the restaurant near where the agitated woman was seen that night, neglected to ask if the mystery woman had been filmed on CCTV cameras and knew nothing about the arrival of an Australian luxury yacht just after Madeleine vanished.

The apparent flaws in this latest development were another salutary lesson for Kate and Gerry McCann, who have relied on private investigators after the Portuguese police spent more time falsely suspecting the parents than searching for their daughter. For their relations with private detectives have been frustrating, unhappy and controversial ever since their daughter’s disappearance in May 2007.

The search has been overseen by the millionaire business Brian Kennedy, 49, who set up Madeleine’s Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned, which aimed ‘to procure that Madeleine’s abduction is thoroughly investigated’. A straight-talking, tough, burly self-made entrepreneur and rugby fanatic, he grew up in a council flat near Tynecastle in Scotland and was brought up as a Jehovah’s Witness. He started his working life as a window cleaner and by 2007 had acquired a £350 million fortune from double-glazing and home-improvement ventures. Kennedy was outraged by the police insinuations against the McCanns and, though a stranger, worked tirelessly on their behalf. ‘His motivation was sincere,’ said someone who worked closely with him. ‘He was appalled by the Portuguese police, but he also had visions of flying in by helicopter to rescue Madeleine.’

Kennedy commissioned private detectives to conduct an investigation parallel to the one run by the Portuguese police. But his choice showed how dangerous it is when powerful and wealthy businessmen try to play detective. In September 2007, he hired Metodo 3, an agency based in Barcelona, on a six-month contract and paid it an estimated £50,000 a month. Metodo 3 was hired because of Spain’s ‘language and cultural connection’ with Portugal. ‘If we’d had big-booted Brits or, heaven forbid, Americans, we would have had doors slammed in our faces’ said Clarence Mitchell, spokesperson for the McCann’s at the time. ‘And it’s quite likely that we could have been charged with hindering the investigation as technically it’s illegal in Portugal to undertake a secondary investigation.

The agency had 35 investigators working on the case in Britain, France, Spain, Portugal and Morocco. A hotline was set up for the public to report sightings and suspicions, and the search focussed on Morocco. But the investigation was dogged by over-confidence and braggadocio. ‘We know who took Madeleine and hope she will be home by Christmas,’ boasted Metodo 3’s flamboyant boss Francisco Marco. But no Madeleine materialised and their contract was not renewed.

Until now, few details have emerged about the private investigation during those crucial early months, but an investigation by ES shows that key mistakes were made, which in turn made later enquiries far more challenging.

ES has spoken to several sources close to the private investigations that took place in the first year and discovered that:

* The involvement of Brian Kennedy and his son Patrick in the operation was counter-productive, notably when they were questioned by the local police for acting suspiciously while attempting a 24-hour ‘stake out’.

* The relationship between Metodo 3 and the Portuguese police had completely broken down.

* Key witnesses were questioned far too aggressively, so much so that some of them later refused to talk to the police.

* Many of the investigators had little experience of the required painstaking forensic detective work.

By April 2008, nearing the first anniversary of the disappearance, Kennedy and the McCanns were desperate. And so when Henri Exton, a former undercover police officer who worked on MI5 operations, and Kevin Halligen, a smooth-talking Irishman who claimed to have worked for covert British government intelligence agency GCHQ, walked through the door, their timing was perfect. Their sales pitch was classic James Bond spook-talk: everything had to be ‘top secret’ and ‘on a need to know basis’. The operation would involve 24-hour alert systems, undercover units, satellite imagery and round-the-clock surveillance teams that would fly in at short notice. This sounded very exciting but, as one source close to the investigation told ES, it was also very expensive and ultimately unsuccessful. ‘The real job at hand was old-fashioned, tedious, forensic police work rather than these boy’s own, glory boy antic,’ he said.

But Kennedy was impressed by the license-to-spy presentation and Exton and Halligen were hire for a fee of £100,000 per month plus expenses. Ostensibly, the contract was with Halligen’s UK security company, Red Defence International Ltd, and an office was set up in Jermyn Street, in St James’s. Only a tiny group of employees did the painstaking investigative work of dealing with thousands of emails and phone calls. Instead, resources were channelled into undercover operations in paedophile rings and among gypsies throughout Europe, encouraged by Kennedy. A five-man surveillance team was dispatched in Portugal, overseen by the experienced Exton, for six weeks.

Born in Belgium in 1951, Exton had been a highly effective undercover officer for the Manchester police. A maverick and dynamic figure, he successfully infiltrated gangs of football hooligans in the 1980’s. While not popular among his colleagues, in 1991 he was seconded to work on MI5 undercover operations against drug dealers, gangsters and terrorists, and was later awarded the Queen’s Police Medal for ‘outstanding bravery’. By all accounts, the charismatic Exton was a dedicated officer. But in November 2002, the stress appeared to have overcome his judgement when he was arrested for shoplifting.

While working on an MI5 surveillance, Exton was caught leaving a tax-free shopping area at Manchester airport with a bottle of perfume he had not paid for. The police were called and he was given the option of the offence being dealt with under caution or to face prosecution. He chose a police caution and so in effect admitted his guilt. Exton was sacked, but was furious about the way he had been treated and threatened to sue MI5. He later set up his own consulting company and moved to Bury in Lancashire.

While Exton, however flawed, was the genuine article as an investigator, Halligen was a very different character. Born in Dublin in 1961, he has been described as a ‘Walter Mitty figure’. He used false names to collect prospective clients at airports in order to preserve secrecy, and he called himself ‘Kevin’ or ‘Richard’ or ‘Patrick’ at different times to describe himself to business contacts. There appears to be no reason for all this subterfuge except that he thought this was what agents did. A conspiracy theorist and lover of the secret world, he is obsessed by surveillance gadgets and even installed a covert camera to spy on his own employees. He claimed to have worked for GCHQ, but in fact he was employed by the Atomic Energy Authority (AEA) as head of defence systems in the rather less glamorous field of new information technology, researching the use of ‘special batteries’. He told former colleagues and potential girlfriends that he used to work for MI5, MI6 and the CIA. He also claimed that he was nearly kidnapped by the IRA, was involved in the first Gulf War and had been a freefall parachutist.

Very little of this is true. What is true is that Halligen has a degree in electronics, worked on the fringes of the intelligence community while at AEA and does understand government communications. He could also be an astonishingly persuasive, engaging and charming individual. Strikingly self-confident and articulate, he could be generous and clubbable. ‘He was very good company but only when it suited him’ says one friend. He kept people in compartments.’

After leaving the AEA, Halligen set up Red Defence International Ltd as an international security and political risk company, advising clients on the risks involved in investing and doing business in unstable, war-torn and corrupt countries. He worked closely with political risk companies and was a persuasive advocate of IT security. In 2006, he struck gold when hired by Trafigura, the Dutch commodities trading company. Executives were imprisoned in the Ivory Coast after toxic waste was dumped in landfills near its biggest city Abidjan. Trafigura was blamed and hired Red Defence International at vast expense to help with the negotiations to release its executives. A Falcon business jet was rented for several months during the operation and it was Halligen’s first taste of the good life. The case only ended when Trafigura paid $197 million to the government of the Ivory Coast to secure the release of the prisoners.

Halligen made a fortune from Trafigura and was suddenly flying everywhere first-class, staying at the Lansborough and Stafford hotels in London and The Willard hotel in Washington DC for months at a time. In 2007 he set up Oakley International Group and registered at the offices of the prestigious law firm Patton Boggs, in Washington DC, as an international security company. He was now strutting the stage as a self-proclaimed international spy expert and joined the Special Forces Club in Knightsbridge, where he met Exton.

During the Madeleine investigation, Halligen spent vast amounts of time in the HeyJo bar in the basement of the Abracadabra Club near his Jermyn Street office. Armed with a clutch of unregistered mobile phones and a Blackberry, the bar was in effect his office. ‘He was there virtually the whole day,’ a former colleague told ES. ‘He had an amazing tolerance for alcohol and a prodigious memory and so occasionally he would have amazing bursts of intelligence, lucidity and insights. They were very rare but they did happen.’

When not imbibing in St James’s, Halligen was in the United States, trying to drum up investors for Oakley International. On 15 August 2008, at the height of the McCann investigation crisis, he persuaded Andre Hollis, a former US Drug enforcement agency official, to write out an $80,000 cheque to Oakley in return for a ten per cent share-holding. The money was then transferred into the private accounts of Halligen and his girlfriend Shirin Trachiotis to finance a holiday in Italy, according to Hollis. In a $6 million lawsuit filed in Fairfax County, Virginia, Hollis alleges that Halligen ‘received monies for Oakley’s services rendered and deposited the same into his personal accounts’ and ‘repeatedly and systematically depleted funds from Oakley’s bank accounts for inappropriate personal expenses’.

Hollis was not the only victim. Mark Aspinall, a respected lawyer who worked closely with Halligen, invested £500,000 in Oakley and lost the lot. Earlier this year he filed a lawsuit in Washington DC against Halligen claiming $1.4 million in damages. The finances of Oakley International are in chaos and numerous employees, specialist consultants and contractors have not been paid. Some of them now face financial ruin.

Meanwhile, Exton was running the surveillance teams in Portugal and often paying his operatives upfront, so would occasionally be out-of-pocket because Halligen had not transferred funds. Exton genuinely believed that progress was being made and substantial and credible reports on child trafficking were submitted. But by mid-August 2008, Kennedy and Gerry McCann were increasingly concerned by an absence of details of how the money was being spent. At one meeting, Halligen was asked how many men constituted a surveillance team and he produced a piece of paper on which he wrote ‘between one and ten’. But he then refused to say how many were working and how much they were being paid.

While Kennedy and Gerry McCann accepted that the mission was extremely difficult and some secrecy was necessary, Halligen was charging very high rates and expenses. And eyebrows were raised when all the money was paid to Oakley International, solely owned and managed by Halligen. One invoice, seen by ES, shows that for ‘accrued expenses to May 5, 2008’ (just one month into the contract), Oakley charged $74,155. The ‘point of contact’ was Halligen who provided a UK mobile telephone number.

While Kennedy was ready to accept Halligen at face value, Gerry McCann ­ sharp, focused and intelligent ­ was more sceptical. The contract with Oakley International and Halligen was terminated by the end of September 2008, after £500,000-plus expenses had been spent.

For the McCanns it was a bitter experience, Exton has returned to Cheshire and, like so many people, is owed money by Halligen. As for Halligen, he has gone into hiding, leaving a trail of debt and numerous former business associates and creditors looking for him. He was last seen in January of this year in Rome, drinking and spending prodigiously at the Hilton Cavalieri and Excelsior hotels. He is now believed by private investigators, who have been searching for him to serve papers on behalf of creditors, to be in the UK and watching his back. Meanwhile, in the eye of the storm, the McCanns continue the search for their lost daughter.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:41:01 AM
Thanks for posting that VIXTE ?>)()<
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 01:43:43 AM
You think? Ever thought of taking a walk in a park or something?

Cannot you read? One of these two ex spies is a crook, sought by many people in this world.  Means, very clever!
So it isn't impossible that people like him make a plan of kidnapping some child and then offer himself to find the child. I think for this kind of a profile of a man this wouldn't be impossible.
That was my first impression, not saying this has happened in this case!

Gosh, imagine your child goes missing and you have to deal with such characters!

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 01:45:12 AM
what they gunna do anne if they do see it ...start a war  @)(++(*
Time has destroyed the lines of Wellington, I'm afraid : all ruins.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 27, 2013, 01:48:50 AM
Cannot you read? One of these two ex spies is a crook, sought by many people in this world.  Means, very clever!
So it isn't impossible that people like him make a plan of kidnapping some child and then offer himself to find the child. I think for this kind of a profile of a man this wouldn't be impossible.
That was my first impression, not saying this has happened in this case!

Gosh, imagine your child goes missing and you have to deal with such characters!

if it was possible why keep her all this time why not bring her home job done get paid ...I find your idea rather daft if you dont mind me saying so  8-)(--)

neeley is right you should take that walk in the park.. 8(0(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 01:52:22 AM
if it was possible why keep her all this time why not bring her home job done get paid ...I find your idea rather daft if you dont mind me saying so  8-)(--)

neeley is right you should take that walk in the park.. 8(0(*

I said I did not think it happened in this case AND said this twice  8(0(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 27, 2013, 01:54:16 AM
I said I did not think it happened in this case AND said this twice  8(0(*

and ? why say it at all bit pointless imo..nevermind ..goodnight
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 01:56:43 AM
So why mention it at all?

I said this was my first impression of these kinds of people, these two ex spies, one being a crook and other stealing perfumes from the duty free shops..  so same time highly effective in investigation fields and on other side with a criminal streak..

And imagine your child is missing and you have to seek help from these kinds of people.. this is what I meant !
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:04:16 AM
So why mention it at all?

Hoax theories make a lot of sense actually, though I know they are discussed by virtually nobody.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 01:11:10 AM
Hoax theories make a lot of sense actually, though I know they are discussed by virtually nobody.

Well, my job for a long time was in a diagnostics field.. nothing connected to these types of theories etc but my colleagues would always ask me 'what was my feeling'  as somehow I would pick up where the fault is..

Same here.. I have been a pro McCann since the day one but at this point I clearly see they were at fault.Then again, when you see with what kinds of people they were dealing and in what position they were then you don't know what to say..

Obviously the Scotland Yard has forgiven them for this mistake, and so did the PJ.. and they left it behind and are both working hard on the actual fresh investigation. So, all is positive now.. but the McCanns must feel awful thinking they might have found clues about Madeleine much earlier.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:12:03 AM
Care to elaborate?

Not in a few minutes. After a good night's sleep, if you're interested.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:14:35 AM
Well, my job for a long time was in a diagnostics field.. nothing connected to these types of theories etc but my colleagues would always ask me 'what was my feeling'  as somehow I would pick up where the fault is..

Same here.. I have been a pro McCann since the day one but at this point I clearly see they were at fault.Then again, when you see with what kinds of people they were dealing and in what position they were then you don't know what to say..

Obviously the Scotland Yard has forgiven them for this mistake, and so did the PJ.. and they left it behind and are both working hard on the actual fresh investigation. So, all is positive now.. but the McCanns must feel awful thinking they might have found clues about Madeleine much earlier.

Interesting thinking VIXTE. I hope you're going to tell us more of your ideas ?{)(** You still think Madeleine was abducted?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:16:01 AM
Indeed I am. Goodnight.

8((()*/ Ok.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 01:20:54 AM
It was a lot more than just the E fits the McCanns kept hidden then  ? 

...  and they had their lawyers issue threats so that it  stayed  hidden 

This is very damaging
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:21:53 AM
You seem terribly confused...

Or thinking in a way differently to the rest of us. That's what we need (not sure it's what you need, but it's what some of us need). Give the poster a chance, blimey. 8(0(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:26:30 AM
It was a lot more than just the E fits the McCanns kept hidden then  ? 

...  and they had their lawyers issue threats so that it  stayed  hidden 

This is very damaging

Only if other papers also mention it, because clearly police know about it already and went ahead with Crimewatch anyway.

Mitchell will be busy.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 01:37:51 AM
Interesting thinking VIXTE. I hope you're going to tell us more of your ideas ?{)(** You still think Madeleine was abducted?

Well, five or something years ago there was an excellent blog from a portuguese guy, it was an excellent review of all possibilities and very realistic and non biased from any side. He also translated it to English.. I cannot find it now, I think it was taken down but I am kind of thinking the same way as him.
My opinion is that it was impossible for the McCanns to cover the crime in PDL at that time they were there.. for that they would need to have a help from their friends and some of their 'friends' they even did not know that well.. for example Matt Oldfield, he did not know the McCanns that well.. and to cover up a crime they would need help from these people. I don't think this is realistically possible for anyone of that group to cover up for the McCanns.

What I am not sure and this hasn't been discussed much is how much would you trust people who are actually not your close friends.  Is it possible that The McCanns are a little bit naive about 'the friends' and that someone among them is a 'hidden criminal'? It might have been that Jane Tanner has said it on purpose about the man carryin g the girl, it might have been that Matt Oldfield has been accomplice in the crime with 'some group' .. I am not saying again that this has happened but if I was investigating this case I would not look at this group as 'the one' like many anties do.. so that is one thing.

Another thing is the possibility that she, Madeleine walked out  on her own.. for that she would need to be able to open the doors, even maybe windows.. Was Madeleine able to do it? We don't know Madeleine, we cannot assume anything here.. maybe she was able to open the doors, maybe the doors were heavy and even me and you would have difficulties to open them.. so we don't know.

And even if Madeleine walked out on her own.. what then happened to her? How come she was never found and nobody brought her back.. and nobody called to say they saw her..

What is confusing me are the road works being done that time,  the road near by was open, with a surrounded hole.. was this checked properly? But looking at the searches the PJ has done, I do believe these searches are done properly and open road holes were fully checked.

Then again, there is a possibility that Madeleine was hit by a car or attacked by a dog and the owner has covered it up.. again no clues found.. was the cover up so good?

The further theory is that she was indeed taken.

And why was she taken? Was it that she saw someone she knows stealing in her apartment?  Someone who worked with her in OC or elsewhere?

Or was it a planned abduction?

As a technical person I tend to think if someone has given me the phone records, thousand of them, I would maybe be able to solve it myself.. it is not hard at all to work with such data if you know what you are doing..

I analised large documents in past and although I worked to find the hackers and similar attacking the system the principle is actually the same.. pinging the masts, the towers, if there were at least two mobile phone towers it would be easier, especially if one is catching the OC area and another the place where the Smith sighting is.. then you can compare the two records.. and voala. find the number that matches both..  and this is if the person was carrying a mobile phone.. but I think this is their biggest bet, together with bank transactions in the area, since they done have CCTVs

Also there are modern policing methods that we don't know about.. their progammes they use to check the data, the data collecting, the phone tapping, the collection of internet searches.. many things that we maybe never heard of or know that are being used..

Playing Agatha Christie or some second hand psychological profiling of the parents, friends etc or old fashioned policing theories like Amaral used wouldn't work in this case, my opinion is that only the modern technology can solve this case.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:48:33 AM
Keep the ideas coming VIXTE. I'll read your big post after a snooze (falling asleep 8(8-)))

Good to have you on the forum ?{)(**
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 08:01:59 AM
The mistake you have all made is that you believe every word written in this article. Have you learnt nothing over the last six years.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 08:03:45 AM
The mistake you have all made is that you believe every word written in this article. Have you learnt nothing over the last six years.

i believe the mcanns would sue anyone if they didnt get their own way they are like that
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 08:47:51 AM
... and while people of this and other forums analyse every word of this article, the PJ and SY will be left in peace to go on with their real work ;)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 27, 2013, 08:54:09 AM
... and while people of this and other forums analyse every word of this article, the PJ and SY will be left in peace to go on with their real work ;)

Exactly Vixte, and I predict scores of new conspiracy theories will be around by the end of the day - but as you say it will keep some people happy whilst the experts get on with the job.



Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 09:04:56 AM
The Times article is a report on history, what is happening in the present is important.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 09:11:06 AM
Exactly Vixte, and I predict scores of new conspiracy theories will be around by the end of the day - but as you say it will keep some people happy whilst the experts get on with the job.

I am quite happy today too.. I know the PJ and SY will find the person who was present at the point of Smiths sighting.
Why? IMO at least of one of the Smiths group had their mobile phone on.. they can find the nearest mobile phone to it at that time.. they can find the person who the Smiths saw carrying the girl.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: C.Edwards on October 27, 2013, 09:23:37 AM
I am quite happy today too.. I know the PJ and SY will find the person who was present at the point of Smiths sighting.
Why? IMO at least of one of the Smiths group had their mobile phone on.. they can find the nearest mobile phone to it at that time.. they can find the person who the Smiths saw carrying the girl.

Mobile phone triangulation doesn't work like that! PDL was not a hotbed of antennae, it will be able to say a phone was within an area of about 2km square along with thousands of others. That's it.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 27, 2013, 09:26:46 AM
I am quite happy today too.. I know the PJ and SY will find the person who was present at the point of Smiths sighting.
Why? IMO at least of one of the Smiths group had their mobile phone on.. they can find the nearest mobile phone to it at that time.. they can find the person who the Smiths saw carrying the girl.

I must admit I know nothing about mobile phones Vixte - but as SY have made a point of mentioning them - they must be on to something relating to the calls made from mobiles at that time.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 09:34:34 AM
Just seen this. Well, well, well - "No Stone Unturned" my backside.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 09:38:26 AM
Why would they keep it secret? And for 5 years?
Maybe they just  disqualified it because they believed Jane Tanner more.. I think this is what Scotland Yard said..


It just shows they talk as  they walk...makes you wonder if that  is why  they wanted private investigators [the dodgy ones] any way ....so as  to controll what was seen and what  wasn't  ......

so much for there................  we  will  leave no  stone unturned
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 09:41:51 AM
The Times article is a report on history, what is happening in the present is important.

Yes, it's a report on history, but one that was hidden. Are you not at all surprised that a paper has written it, considering that it doesn't make the Mccanns look terribly good?

I find it especially surprising considering that the Mccanns have been 'cleared', you'd think that all the papers would be coming out in sympathy for the parents of a missing child, not pointing the finger at them for hiding information!

Curiouser and curiouser!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 09:44:04 AM
Yes, it's a report on history, but one that was hidden. Are you not at all surprised that a paper has written it, considering that it doesn't make the Mccanns look terribly good?

I find it especially surprising considering that the Mccanns have been 'cleared', you'd think that all the papers would be coming out in sympathy for the parents of a missing child, not pointing the finger at them for hiding information!

Curiouser and curiouser!

I have no problem with papers reporting facts.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 09:49:06 AM
Any objective analysis was always going to be highly critical - that's why they hired those clowns Metodo 3 who just said what they wanted to hear.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 10:00:42 AM
Important note

My post « Reply #5 on: Today at 12:11:19 AM » was a direct copy and paste from the Times article which was available to subscription members only.

John edited my post « Last Edit: Today at 02:02:07 AM by John »

I am now unable to verify that the Times article is accurate as I have no idea what edits John made and i am not going to do a word by word check with the original.




Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:05:22 AM
What this thread shows me is how gullible the anti McCann posters are. you see an article that criticises the McCanns and you are happy to believe every word. As I have said before This is why your conclusions are so way off the mark. It really indicates a lack of intelligence. I don't have time now but later will show where the holes are in this article. I will give you one pointer....why did the relationship with the McCanns and the investigators fail....could it have anything to do with the antics of Halligan...the convicted fraudster
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: C.Edwards on October 27, 2013, 10:09:18 AM
What this thread shows me is how gullible the anti McCann posters are. you see an article that criticises the McCanns and you are happy to believe every word. As I have said before This is why your conclusions are so way off the mark. It really indicates a lack of intelligence. I don't have time now but later will show where the holes are in this article. I will give you one pointer....why did the relationship with the McCanns and the investigators fail....could it have anything to do with the antics of Halligan...the convicted fraudster

and...

The McCanns don't have to .... the papers have cleared the McCanns...every article now says the parents aren't suspects and the PJ are looking for an abductor

 @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 10:11:53 AM
What this thread shows me is how gullible the anti McCann posters are. you see an article that criticises the McCanns and you are happy to believe every word. As I have said before This is why your conclusions are so way off the mark. It really indicates a lack of intelligence. I don't have time now but later will show where the holes are in this article. I will give you one pointer....why did the relationship with the McCanns and the investigators fail....could it have anything to do with the antics of Halligan...the convicted fraudster

Stick to the Daily Star mate that should keep you happy.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 10:14:07 AM
two important things in the article

Quote
Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: C.Edwards on October 27, 2013, 10:16:28 AM
two important things in the article

Quote
Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.

Ah well. You don't expect us to believe everything we read in the papers, do you?  What do you think we are - gullible or something?

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:16:46 AM
Quote from: davel on Today at 07:46:32 AM

The McCanns don't have to .... the papers have cleared the McCanns...every article now says the parents aren't suspects and the PJ are looking for an abductor

You are the number one gullible poster..if you read the above post, it says the papers have cleared the McCanns..and that is a fact. .... doesn't say I believe it.....you don't have the critical observational skills to understand the subtlety in the post
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 10:17:19 AM
and...

 @)(++(* @)(++(* @)(++(*

do you think the mcanns and [ censored word ] find this news hurtful and unhelpful???
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 10:17:46 AM
Mobile phone triangulation doesn't work like that! PDL was not a hotbed of antennae, it will be able to say a phone was within an area of about 2km square along with thousands of others. That's it.

Well, if there are at least two towers in PDL then it is possible to catch movements of people. 

I know of at least 3 modern cases solved through the mobile phone analysis. The most famous one being Joanna Yeates's case.. the killer was caught when his mobile phone was crossing from one tower reception to another..
Another case is abroad, a girl was missing, they found the mobile phone which nearest to hears, i.e matching all masts receptions along the way the abductor travelled with the girl.

The third one I heard of today.. a foreign kidnapped gill calls her mum from a London flat,  the kidnapper takes her phone but she has another phone in her bag, switched on, the Scotland Yard finds her in time on minutes.. i.e the location of the flat in London where she is !

That tells a lot!

Regarding the signals in PDL.. yes it is a rural area, but since there is lots of tourist there in the summer they have to work on a good mobile phone reception.

Both PJ and SY, there are recent reports about 'good findings' in the mobile phone analysing areas of research so I believe it is not that black and white as it would be if there is only one tower in the area and everyone is connecting just to that point..
In this case, there is not a lot they can work on but they can at least know which mobiles were in the area and which mobiles left the area that night.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 10:18:27 AM
Ah well. You don't expect us to believe everything we read in the papers, do you?  What do you think we are - gullible or something?

you can pick and chose what you want to believe from The Times article - be my guest.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:19:47 AM
Ah well. You don't expect us to believe everything we read in the papers, do you?  What do you think we are - gullible or something?
[/quote


you see Mr Gullible you have proved my point,,..you are happy to believe certain parts of the article but not others.


Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 10:29:37 AM
If this article is being faithfully reported and is  accurate then it is a damning indictment and questions the sincerity of the McCann's search.

You have to wonder if the PIs knew about Innocentman. Does he even exist or has he just been invented to get the McCanns off the hook for sitting on this for 5 years?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: C.Edwards on October 27, 2013, 10:30:02 AM
Oh my, someone's grumpy this morning.  @)(++(*  I seem to have touched a nerve.

re: the title of this topic, it is somewhat extraordinary to discover that the McCanns have been suppressing this - now supposedly critical, according to SY - information for years.  That makes a certain libel trial ongoing at the moment a bit of a formality.

Just keep spinning, just keep spinning... to paraphrase Dory.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 10:30:54 AM
What this thread shows me is how gullible the anti McCann posters are. you see an article that criticises the McCanns and you are happy to believe every word. As I have said before This is why your conclusions are so way off the mark. It really indicates a lack of intelligence. I don't have time now but later will show where the holes are in this article. I will give you one pointer....why did the relationship with the McCanns and the investigators fail....could it have anything to do with the antics of Halligan...the convicted fraudster

What this thread shows me is how gullible the anti McCann posters are. you see an article that criticises the McCanns and you are happy to believe every word. As I have said before This is why your conclusions are so way off the mark

.....................................................................................

This could also be said  about  you lot  .....you believe  the mccs...........and everything they  do or say ...[[yet no proof of abduction]



I will give you one pointer....why did the relationship with the McCanns and the investigators fail....could it have anything to do with the antics of Halligan...the convicted fraudster
...

it was the mccs who hired them  ......payed them .....could be the antics of the mccs .....especially if they were getting to close for comfort....



One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.

The team of investigators from the security firm Oakley International were hired by the McCanns’ Find Madeleine fund, which bankrolled private investigations into the girl’s disappearance. They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

Their report, seen by The Sunday Times, focused on a sighting by an Irish family of a man carrying a child at about 10pm on May 3, 2007, when Madeleine went missing.

An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.

Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: C.Edwards on October 27, 2013, 10:31:19 AM
If this article is being faithfully reported and is  accurate then it is a damning indictment and questions the sincerity of the McCann's search.

You have to wonder if the PIs knew about Innocentman. Does he even exist or has he just been invented to get the McCanns off the hook for sitting on this for 5 years?

It would be extraordinary for the Times to not do their research over something as serious as this though, wouldn't you think?  I have no reason to believe it's inaccurate, but let's give it a day or so and see if there are any retractions/rebuttals.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 10:37:15 AM
I wonder how this matter will affect the libel trial ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: comanche on October 27, 2013, 10:38:30 AM
We will wait to see what materialises not jump for joy as some posters do, so strange.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 10:38:41 AM
The PJ interviewed the Smiths and had the information before any PIs
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 10:44:04 AM
I thought it was mainly Brian Kennedy who paid for this, ie who paid this through the fund and it was him who found this Private Investigators.
I don't see him suing the McCanns for his money so  if he is happy to spend his money this way and happy with the outcome I don't see any financial misuse.

The only problem is in a wrong judgement by the McCanns side. The question is if they knew this lead was the right lead.. whether they would wait for 5 years for this to come to the light.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 10:47:43 AM
Quote from: davel on Today at 07:46:32 AM

The McCanns don't have to .... the papers have cleared the McCanns...every article now says the parents aren't suspects and the PJ are looking for an abductor

You are the number one gullible poster..if you read the above post, it says the papers have cleared the McCanns..and that is a fact. .... doesn't say I believe it.....you don't have the critical observational skills to understand the subtlety in the post

We all know I'm a bit dense, can you point out the subtleties for me please? I'm almost certainly missing them.

On another note, if the Mccanns have been cleared of all involvement as is constantly being reported by SY and The Mccanns criminal lawyer, why are papers now printing negetive things about the poor, blighted parents?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 10:55:28 AM
The PJ interviewed the Smiths and had the information before any PIs


yes  but  G.A. was  took of the case  [wasn't that from pressure from the uk]...then  pr machine  got in motion
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 10:57:37 AM
We all know I'm a bit dense, can you point out the subtleties for me please? I'm almost certainly missing them.

On another note, if the Mccanns have been cleared of all involvement as is constantly being reported by SY and The Mccanns criminal lawyer, why are papers now printing negetive things about the poor, blighted parents?

Well, both SY and PJ know about this report from the past and both police forces have announced that the parents are not suspects.. so there is no a criminal action by parents deciding that these  old PIs findings in the past were rubbish.

They might have been only morally wrong..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Luz on October 27, 2013, 10:58:43 AM
Well, both SY and PJ know about this report from the past and both police forces have announced that the parents are not suspects.. so there is no a criminal action by parents deciding that these  old PIs findings in the past were rubbish.

They might have been only morally wrong..

The PJ have done no such thing, they are under the secrecy law.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 11:01:38 AM
The PJ interviewed the Smiths and had the information before any PIs

But they did not have the efits.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 27, 2013, 11:01:48 AM
The PJ have done no such thing, they are under the secrecy law.

when it suits you mean... 8-)(--)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 11:03:29 AM
The PJ have done no such thing, they are under the secrecy law.

Wasn't there a breaking news 'McCanns are not suspects' on the TVI Portugal night before last night?

And also McCanns lawyer in Portugal has said they were told they are no longer suspects at the police briefing to which they were invited to on the 17th?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Luz on October 27, 2013, 11:03:44 AM
when it suits you mean... 8-)(--)

Sorry to disappoint you, but so far nobody from the Public Ministry or the PJ declared the McCann non suspects. Only their lawyer said that and the journos that reproduced his declarations. The PGR declined to answer.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 11:04:27 AM
But they did not have the efits.

There was nothing stopping PJ from doing their own efits in 2007.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 11:05:10 AM
Well, both SY and PJ know about this report from the past and both police forces have announced that the parents are not suspects.. so there is no a criminal action by parents deciding that these  old PIs findings in the past were rubbish.

They might have been only morally wrong..


Anyone claiming there  innocence  .etc etc .....IMO have no  choice [they have  to whatch their backs were  the mccs are concerned  at the moment].................but  one little thing can  change  all that
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 11:09:38 AM
There was nothing stopping PJ from doing their own efits in 2007.

That's a different issue. 8(0(* That's not relevant to the questions about these efits raised after Crimewatch and in this Times article - why did the people who did have the efits not use them for five years?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 11:11:47 AM
That's a different issue. 8(0(* That's not relevant to the questions about these efits raised after Crimewatch and in this Times article - why did the people who did have the efits not use them for five years?

as I said earlier - it is history and doesn't bother me.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 11:12:38 AM
That's a different issue. 8(0(* That's not relevant to the questions about these efits raised after Crimewatch and in this Times article - why did the people who did have the efits not use them for five years?

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.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 11:14:37 AM
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.

That is precisely the point.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 11:14:42 AM
Interesting that people are willing to accept what The Times says at face value!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 11:16:12 AM
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?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 11:16:45 AM
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.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 11:18:11 AM
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
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 11:19:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 11:19:56 AM
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.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 11:21:03 AM
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?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 11:24:06 AM
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.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 11:25:01 AM
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 ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 11:25:10 AM
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.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 11:26:19 AM


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.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Luz on October 27, 2013, 11:26:34 AM
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?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 11:28:32 AM
Since when did it help to withhold, what could be vital evidence ?

why did the PJ suppress vital evidence?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 11:28:56 AM

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
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 11:29:25 AM
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.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 11:30:22 AM
Then the blame will fall fairly and squarely on the PJ for not investigating the Smith sighting fully at the appropriate time.
Why do you think Paulo Rebelo dropped the proceedings concerning the Smith family ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 11:32:50 AM
why did the PJ suppress vital evidence?

I wasn't talking about the PJ ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: faithlilly on October 27, 2013, 11:33:40 AM
Seems to me that while the McCanns considered the efits 'tainted' by the financial dispute between them and Halligen SY have no such qualms with regard to their usefulness.

Further if these are considered by SY to be a key element in cracking the case won't the populous be appalled that several million more pounds of public money has been spent on this case than needed to be, and if Madeleine is alive several more years spent by her in goodness knows what situation, than if the efits had been handed over to SY in the beginning ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Luz on October 27, 2013, 11:33:50 AM
Why do you think Paulo Rebelo dropped the proceedings concerning the Smith family ?

I may be committing a defamation crime, but I believe that Rebelo was ordered to file the case, instead of following the very important lead Amaral was following about the Smith's sighting.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: C.Edwards on October 27, 2013, 11:34:24 AM
Interesting that people are willing to accept what The Times says at face value!

Are you really trying to imply that this story in the times is inaccurate and/or misleading?  Nail your colours to the mast here.  Or are you prepared to "wait and see"?  Your post implicitly expresses ridicule at those who accept what is written in the Times.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 11:35:42 AM
Are you really trying to imply that this story in the times is inaccurate and/or misleading?  Nail your colours to the mast here.  Or are you prepared to "wait and see"?  Your post implicitly expresses ridicule at those who accept what is written in the Times.

I am certainly saying that it may be misleading
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 11:37:33 AM
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.
Fishy, yes, for those who knew the flashback Mr Smith had on the 9th of September 2007. Very few people. And who, among those, didn't understand that underlining Smithman was like shooting one's own foot ?
Now why have they given SY those unhelpful e-fits ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 11:38:11 AM
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.

They didn't have an efit for the 9.15 sighting, so the chances of identifying that man must have been far lower from just a sketch without facial detail.

Wouldn't they want to use every tool they had available Anne? No efit for 9.15 man, but they have one for a man they finally link to the disappearance in Cutting Edge and they don't use it? I can't see any explanation for that. Not a rational one anyway.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 11:49:31 AM
I may be committing a defamation crime, but I believe that Rebelo was ordered to file the case, instead of following the very important lead Amaral was following about the Smith's sighting.
8)-))) Are you afraid KMC will send a threat to you too ?
What I'm sure of is that Portugal was ready to do everything to find little Madeleine, ready to do the necessary to arrest and condemn the abductor. Mr Smith wasn't pointing to that direction, so end of. Haven't they reopened to find an abductor ? If SY thinks Smithman could be an abductor, good for them ! But the MP is like a cat that burnt itself in hot water : it fears cold one.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 11:50:45 AM
perhaps those posters who want to accept this article at face value should do a little research on the authors...I'm surprised they are still working for the Times after the last libel case
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Luz on October 27, 2013, 11:52:39 AM
It seems the populace chose to shoot the messenger instead of the message.

Let's watch.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 11:56:40 AM
 
This is what justice Tugendhat had to say about the pair of them in his ruling regarding a libel case last year...


Tugendhat J today said that the two reporters knew the articles to be false, adding: “They did have a dominant intention to injure Mr Cruddas and they expressed delight when they learnt that they had caused his resignation.”

The judge also found that the journalists repeatedly misled their editors about their justification for pursuing the meeting with Cruddas and for using subterfuge against him.

The judge said: “It is very surprising that the journalists should so consistently and seriously have misled the editor as to the basis on which they sought authorisation for the use of subterfuge.”



I think GULLIBLE is a good word to describe the posters who have swallowed this story..hook,line and sinker
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 11:57:16 AM
perhaps those posters who want to accept this article at face value should do a little research on the authors...I'm surprised they are still working for the Times after the last libel case

I'll do that research now...

In the meantime, what is your opinion on a paper printing what would appear to be bad press about the Mccanns just at the moment they've been 'cleared'?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 12:00:29 PM
I'll do that research now...

In the meantime, what is your opinion on a paper printing what would appear to be bad press about the Mccanns just at the moment they've been 'cleared'?

We have been told this morning that a poster on here took out a subscription just to read the article...its about making money...having said that ..if Carter Ruck see this..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 12:01:11 PM
 
This is what justice Tugendhat had to say about the pair of them in his ruling regarding a libel case last year...


Tugendhat J today said that the two reporters knew the articles to be false, adding: “They did have a dominant intention to injure Mr Cruddas and they expressed delight when they learnt that they had caused his resignation.”

The judge also found that the journalists repeatedly misled their editors about their justification for pursuing the meeting with Cruddas and for using subterfuge against him.

The judge said: “It is very surprising that the journalists should so consistently and seriously have misled the editor as to the basis on which they sought authorisation for the use of subterfuge.”



I think GULLIBLE is a good word to describe the posters who have swallowed this story..hook,line and sinker

Calm down davel. Don't libel them accidentally.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 12:10:20 PM
We have been told this morning that a poster on here took out a subscription just to read the article...its about making money...having said that ..if Carter Ruck see this..

I agree it's about making money. It's a different tactic than usually employed though isn't it?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on October 27, 2013, 12:11:09 PM
I may be committing a defamation crime, but I believe that Rebelo was ordered to file the case, instead of following the very important lead Amaral was following about the Smith's sighting.

According to whom?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 12:12:30 PM
I am certainly saying that it may be misleading


The  whole case is misleading .............but some would rather say the mccs are innocent ...so leave it as it is

Others don't believe the mccs version...........and why should they be told  what  to think .


all the  mccs had  to do was ...........produce the e fit

wonder how people who donated to the fund will feel this morning........... How much extra cost would have been involved in adding the e-fits to their website and the book,

were all of the photos in the book essential compared to the possible identification of the "abductor"?

And how much of the fund money did it cost to silence the investigators..........and  why
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 12:15:22 PM

The  whole case is misleading .............but some would rather say the mccs are innocent ...so leave it as it is

Others don't believe the mccs version...........and why should they be told  what  to think .


all the  mccs had  to do was ...........produce the e fit

wonder how people who donated to the fund will feel this morning........... How much extra cost would have been involved in adding the e-fits to their website and the book,

were all of the photos in the book essential compared to the possible identification of the "abductor"?

And how much of the fund money did it cost to silence the investigators..........and  why

you must be one of the most gullible ones then...don't you understand that the article is at the best questionable
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 12:16:18 PM
bundleman's still on findmadeleine.com

does he remain a suspect?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 12:17:22 PM
you must be one of the most gullible ones then...don't you understand that the article is at the best questionable

why is that then
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 12:20:06 PM
why is that then

Cause davel doesn't like it. The Times is probably 'evil'!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 12:20:21 PM
why is that then

do you not read the other posts..look back a few posts and you will see
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aegean on October 27, 2013, 12:20:36 PM
Some are saying this article, its authors, the private investigators are questionable. That may be so. On the other hand, the McCanns had these efits in their possession five years ago, and we have only just heard about them. Who is responsible for that, if not them?

I'd also note that the British press got burned quite badly with some coverage of the case, so I'd imagine they'd be treading quite carefully now and have everything legally checked and not publish anything that cannot be fully verified.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 12:21:12 PM
Cause davel doesn't like it. The Times is probably 'evil'!

 8(0(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 12:23:06 PM
Well said Aegean ?{)(**
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 12:23:34 PM
Cause davel doesn't like it. The Times is probably 'evil'!

if that's the best you can do when it has been shown that the honesty of these journalists has been questioned by a judge  in open court...then believe what you want...your opinion is totally worthless
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 12:26:39 PM
if that's the best you can do when it has been shown that the honesty of these journalists has been questioned by a judge  in open court...then believe what you want...your opinion is totally worthless

Ethics davel, not honesty 8(0(* Big difference.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 12:29:07 PM
Ethics davel, not honesty 8(0(* Big difference.

the judge stated that they had printed things they knew to be false..that is dishonesty to me
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 12:29:58 PM
if that's the best you can do when it has been shown that the honesty of these journalists has been questioned by a judge  in open court...then believe what you want...your opinion is totally worthless

I probably deserved that, My comment was a little snide.

I would say though that you've always found my opinions worthless for the simple reason that they don't tally with yours.

Live and let live davel!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 12:30:34 PM
the judge stated that they had printed things they knew to be false..that is dishonesty to me

I'm guessing you're not a lawyer then 8(>((
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 12:31:14 PM
bundleman's still on findmadeleine.com

does he remain a suspect?
He has gone from the main page. Now he's very small among other suspects like the spectacular Spotty and Spice lookalike.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 12:31:52 PM
I probably deserved that, My comment was a little snide.

I would say though that you've always found my opinions worthless for the simple reason that they don't tally with yours.

Live and let live davel!

Lets say I was surprised because I thought you had  a little more intelligence
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 12:35:33 PM
do you not read the other posts..look back a few posts and you will see


its your post  i was referring to .......your  comment ...

are  you   seriously trying to say  .....whatever posts your referring too.....are to be  taken as  gospel then ....yet  not the article .....and you call me gullable ...what a joke
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 12:37:26 PM

its your post  i was referring to .......your  comment ...

are  you   seriously trying to say  .....whatever posts your referring too.....are to be  taken as  gospel then ....yet  not the article .....and you call me gullable ...what a joke

they seem nasty and agitated today dont they and very tetchy
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 12:38:58 PM
Lets say I was surprised because I thought you had  a little more intelligence

I'm surprised that the storey has been printed at all. I'd be amazed if it were not true as the Mccanns are so litigious (though my husband pointed out that newspapers will make a calculated assessment of whether they lose more in a libel case than they'd gain in sale, and if x is higher than y, they'll print anyway, I don't think that's entirely true since Leveson though).

The point I've repeatedly made that has not been addressed is: Why now?

If they have actually been 'cleared' surly getting on the wrong side of grieving parents is a stupid thing to do?

If public opinion is clearly on their side, why write a negative story? Surly that would make the paper look really bad when the 'real' culprit has been found?

For those that believe the Mccanns have been exonerated, does this story come across as spiteful?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 12:44:59 PM
they seem nasty and agitated today don't they and very tetchy


It makes you wonder if they don't ever want the truth to come out ....it seems to me   ......its  all about the mccs ...with them  ....[yet  they  have  enough lawyers etc looking after them ]........someone has  to care what happened to maddie IMO.....................one story is good till another one  is told ...............its the other story they   don't seem to like ....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 12:46:53 PM

It makes you wonder if they don't ever want the truth to come out ....it seems to me   ......its  all about the mccs ...with them  ....[yet  they  have  enough lawyers etc looking after them ]........someone has  to care what happened to maddie IMO.....................one story is good till another one  is told ...............its the other story they   don't seem to like ....

exactly  whatever the truth is maddie would be fine anda  normal  10  year old if the mcanns had not been so selfish
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 27, 2013, 12:48:08 PM

It makes you wonder if they don't ever want the truth to come out ....it seems to me   ......its  all about the mccs ...with them  ....[yet  they  have  enough lawyers etc looking after them ]........someone has  to care what happened to maddie IMO.....................one story is good till another one  is told ...............its the other story they   don't seem to like ....

Wow heavy on the elipsis there. The fact is it's all stories. The truth is, tow police forces are now investigating, and they are not investigating the parents of a missing child. Caring about what happened to that little girl isn't exclusively exhibited by tormenting her parents.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 12:48:45 PM
my husband pointed out that newspapers will make a calculated assessment of whether they lose more in a libel case than they'd gain in sale, and if x is higher than y, they'll print anyway, I don't think that's entirely true since Leveson though).

The Express group said they got back, with their "apologize" newspapers and all the following ones with comments, the money of the off court settlement, without counting their improved credit.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 12:53:43 PM
Wow heavy on the elipsis there. The fact is it's all stories. The truth is, tow police forces are now investigating, and they are not investigating the parents of a missing child. Caring about what happened to that little girl isn't exclusively exhibited by tormenting her parents.


laughable .............do you think the so called  parent care  what i think .................i would have thought they have a lot more  to worry about than that  .....

ellipsis........as  two l... 8((()*/
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 12:56:40 PM

laughable .............do you think the so called  parent care  what i think .................i would have thought they have a lot more  to worry about than that  .....

ellipsis........as  two l... 8((()*/

the thing is too the mcanns are adults in their  40s they are more then able to    defend themselves maddie  was a helpless    toddler and   she told them she cried and they still left her.....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 01:02:30 PM
I'm still in shock here. Why would parents of a missing child sit on information for 5 years, information that is now Scotland Yard's main lead?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 01:03:41 PM
I'm still in shock here. Why would parents of a missing child sit on information for 5 years, information that is now Scotland Yard's main lead?

I wonder how many other people are asking that question this morning?

Lots, I hope!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 01:05:01 PM
Oh god it's the gypsies again

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeline-mccann-police-hunt-three-2644559

What have they got against these poor people?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 01:08:57 PM
Oh god it's the gypsies again

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeline-mccann-police-hunt-three-2644559

What have they got against these poor people?

could it bea class divide?? [ censored word ] are always saying the mcanns are better then us mere mortals
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on October 27, 2013, 01:09:34 PM
I find the article in question to be quite perplexing.

Amongst other things, if the McCanns had received the full report in Nov 08, why would the Met had had to request a copy from the authors?


The pictures of a man who may have taken Madeleine were drawn up in 2008 (Adrian Sheratt) The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised timeline should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund.

Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

Did the McCanns actually have access to those e-fits? Did both exist at the time or was one done later by the Met?

How accurate is this article? Is it a coincidence that it has been published after the case has been reopened and judicial secrecy now applies again? If there are inaccuracies, who can rebut them?



Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 01:12:26 PM

its your post  i was referring to .......your  comment ...

are  you   seriously trying to say  .....whatever posts your referring too.....are to be  taken as  gospel then ....yet  not the article .....and you call me gullable ...what a joke

no ..I'm saying as I said before ,,the article is at least questionable..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 01:12:53 PM
I find the article in question to be quite perplexing.

Amongst other things, if the McCanns had received the full report in Nov 08, why would the Met had had to request a copy from the authors?


Perplexing? It's quite simple really they didn't want anyone to read it.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 01:16:27 PM
I'm surprised that the storey has been printed at all. I'd be amazed if it were not true as the Mccanns are so litigious (though my husband pointed out that newspapers will make a calculated assessment of whether they lose more in a libel case than they'd gain in sale, and if x is higher than y, they'll print anyway, I don't think that's entirely true since Leveson though).

The point I've repeatedly made that has not been addressed is: Why now?

If they have actually been 'cleared' surly getting on the wrong side of grieving parents is a stupid thing to do?

If public opinion is clearly on their side, why write a negative story? Surly that would make the paper look really bad when the 'real' culprit has been found?

For those that believe the Mccanns have been exonerated, does this story come across as spiteful?

the article is an attempt to cash in..pure and simple..to read the full article it seems you have to take out a subscription costing £20.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 01:18:02 PM
the article is an attempt to cash in..pure and simple..to read the full article it seems you have to take out a subscription costing £20.

not really a surprise given that it's a subscription-only site
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 01:18:58 PM
the article is an attempt to cash in..pure and simple..to read the full article it seems you have to take out a subscription costing £20.

It's in the paper. The printed edition. How much does a Sunday paper cost? It's under 2 quid.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:19:48 PM
the article is an attempt to cash in..pure and simple..to read the full article it seems you have to take out a subscription costing £20.

It's the Times, not the National Enquirer 8)-)))
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 01:20:30 PM
you  could say the mcann store  was a way to cash in too...... including paying for  free posters made off a printer
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 01:21:36 PM
It's in the paper. The printed edition. How much does a Sunday paper cost? It's under 2 quid.

you don't have to accept what I say..doesn't matter
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 27, 2013, 01:21:51 PM
the article is an attempt to cash in..pure and simple..to read the full article it seems you have to take out a subscription costing £20.

duped ... wonder how many fell for this  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on October 27, 2013, 01:23:29 PM
Perplexing? It's quite simple really they didn't want anyone to read it.

Who's "they"? The Sunday Times?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 01:25:17 PM
you don't have to accept what I say..doesn't matter

What? I agreed with you that it was designed to make money! Not the £20 that you're claiming has to be paid, but the story itself.

The Mccanns sell papers, any story about them has ££££ signs on it.

I just think it's interesting that a negative story comes out just as they have been 'cleared'.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 01:29:05 PM
What? I agreed with you that it was designed to make money! Not the £20 that you're claiming has to be paid, but the story itself.

The Mccanns sell papers, any story about them has ££££ signs on it.

I just think it's interesting that a negative story comes out just as they have been 'cleared'.

What we have seen is that once a story is printed it is picked up by other papers. Lets see how many other papers print this story
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 27, 2013, 01:29:45 PM
We have been told this morning that a poster on here took out a subscription just to read the article...its about making money...having said that ..if Carter Ruck see this..

But did they, or is it copied from where I have found it? And no I won't be posting a link to it!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aegean on October 27, 2013, 01:30:24 PM
the article is an attempt to cash in..pure and simple..to read the full article it seems you have to take out a subscription costing £20.

The Times and Sunday Times have a paywall and have done for about three years now. You therefore have to have a subscription to read all their articles, so it's hardly as though this particular one was published just so they can cash in. As others have mentioned, you can always by the print version, which is what people used to do daily not so long ago. Or you can even take a 1 month subscription for £8.

Newspapers having a subscription is hardly about "cashing in", the point is to make money to cover their costs. No one ever complained about having to pay for printed editions.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 01:31:17 PM
The Times and Sunday Times have a paywall and have done for about three years now. You therefore have to have a subscription to read all their articles, so it's hardly as though this particular one was published just so they can cash in. As others have mentioned, you can always by the print version, which is what people used to do daily not so long ago. Or you can even take a 1 month subscription for £8.

Newspapers having a subscription is hardly about "cashing in", the point is to make money to cover their costs. No one ever complained about having to pay for printed editions.

here in australia  most of  our  online papers you have to pay no big deal
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 27, 2013, 01:32:55 PM
This story in now in the German Bild Zeitung.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 01:33:43 PM
I can't believe it's true. No loving parents of a missing child would send the world on a wild goose chase for 5 years, surely?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 01:34:25 PM
I can't believe it's true. No loving parents of a missing child would send the world on a wild goose chase for 5 years, surely?

not even if money was involved??
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 01:36:51 PM
This story in now in the German Bild Zeitung.

Lets see if any uk papers run it...could be a bonanza payday for the MCCanns if they do
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 01:38:54 PM
duped ... wonder how many fell for this  @)(++(*


duped...............everyone i know bought the  paper  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:39:29 PM
This story in now in the German Bild Zeitung.

Why were indications held back for years?
http://www.bild.de/news/ausland/maddie-mccann/fall-maddie-mccann-hinweise-jahrelang-vertuscht-33145312.bild.html (http://www.bild.de/news/ausland/maddie-mccann/fall-maddie-mccann-hinweise-jahrelang-vertuscht-33145312.bild.html)

Oh dear. That's not helpful.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 27, 2013, 01:39:38 PM
Lets see if any uk papers run it...could be a bonanza payday for the MCCanns if they do

Do you think the McCanns would attempt to sue the papers?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 01:41:30 PM
Do you think the McCanns would attempt to sue the papers?

If someone printed blatant lies about you..what would you do
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 27, 2013, 01:42:41 PM

laughable .............do you think the so called  parent care  what i think .................i would have thought they have a lot more  to worry about than that  .....

ellipsis........as  two l... 8((()*/

I really can't understand what you are saying here.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 01:44:52 PM
This would be an absolutely massive story IF TRUE..as yet no other papers running it
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:47:09 PM
This would be an absolutely massive story IF TRUE..as yet no other papers running it

It's true the efits were not used for five years. That's the big issue here. Why weren't they used? There was no efit for JT's man. Why not use the one you did have?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 01:47:17 PM
If someone printed blatant lies about you..what would you do

What  'lies'  are there in this article  ...   what is written there that you  know to be untrue  ?

The Times have SEEN  the report written by Oakley
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 01:47:30 PM
This would be an absolutely massive story IF TRUE..as yet no other papers running it

Lets wait and see!

I'm particularly interested to see if the telly picks up on it too!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 01:50:00 PM
This would be an absolutely massive story IF TRUE..as yet no other papers running it

It's really not good enough to say "I'm not really interested in why the 10pm e-fits weren't used for five years" as many here and elsewhere have.

Not good enough at all.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 01:50:41 PM
This would be an absolutely massive story IF TRUE..as yet no other papers running it

The Times have a  'scoop'  ...  those investigative reporters somehow managed to get hold of that report ex MI5  operatives wrote

 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 01:52:01 PM
Some good excuses flowing here:


it's not true
it's all Amara's fault or the PJ/some-swarthy-fellow
it's the Smiths' fault
it all happened a long time ago and no longer relevant

keep 'em coming!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 01:52:30 PM
The Times have a  'scoop'  ...  those investigative reporters somehow managed to get hold of that report ex MI5  operatives wrote

ex MI5...Are you talking about Halligan the conman
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 27, 2013, 01:54:12 PM
ex MI5...Are you talking about Halligan the conman

No its Henri Exton, Davel.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 01:54:26 PM
The Times have a  'scoop'   ...  those investigative reporters somehow managed to get hold of that report ex MI5  operatives wrote

either the times have a scoop or you are as gullible as hell..lets wait
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 01:56:47 PM
No its Henri Exton, Davel.

I did know...so Henry Exton...they don't come much smarter was working closely with Halligan..a conman... and he didn't realise...not quite so smart is he
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 01:57:10 PM
Lets see if any uk papers run it...could be a bonanza payday for the MCCanns if they do

you seem  to have a hidden agenda...................you don't want  it to be  true [why is  that] ......have  you  a problem with the truth........like  your comment  IF...carter ruck see  it ............THEY WILL.....so wait and  see what  happens

they have  been happy with all the so called sightings around the world  ...everything  gives them hope ....yet  this kept quiet.......

Perverting the course of justice
The Offence
3. Perverting the course of justice is a serious offence. It can only be tried on indictment and carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The offence is committed where a person:

does an act (a positive act or series of acts is required; mere inaction is insufficient)
which has a tendency to pervert and
which is intended to pervert
the course of public justice.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 27, 2013, 01:58:19 PM
The Times have a  'scoop'  ...  those investigative reporters somehow managed to get hold of that report ex MI5  operatives wrote

Yeah, a poop scoop  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 01:58:40 PM
So whats Exton doing now, who is the source for this article and how much have they been paid..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 02:02:55 PM
you seem  to have a hidden agenda...................you don't want  it to be  true [why is  that] ......have  you  a problem with the truth........like  your comment  IF...carter ruck see  it ............THEY WILL.....so wait and  see what  happens

they have  been happy with all the so called sightings around the world  ...everything  gives them hope ....yet  this kept quiet.......

Perverting the course of justice
The Offence
3. Perverting the course of justice is a serious offence. It can only be tried on indictment and carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The offence is committed where a person:

does an act (a positive act or series of acts is required; mere inaction is insufficient)
which has a tendency to pervert and
which is intended to pervert
the course of public justice.

hidden agenda..don't want it to be true...no
I want to get to the truth and the only way you get to the truth is by being critical of the evidence..I have shown clearly why this article should be questioned...you seem to be willing to accept anything without question...a bit stupid really
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: faithlilly on October 27, 2013, 02:04:06 PM
I don't know if this has been covered already but within the article there are quotes from ' a source from the fund' or words to that effect which means that the McCanns were aware of the article before it was published and if the Times reporters really hadn't done their homework and there were inaccuracies within the article Carter Ruck would have been all over it like a rash.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 02:06:03 PM
What  'lies'  are there in this article  ...   what is written there that you  know to be untrue  ?

The Times have SEEN  the report written by Oakley

my post doesn't mention the article..it is a simple question that hasn't been answered
For your information..I haven't said any of it lies..that would be decided in court..not on  aforum
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 02:06:58 PM
hidden agenda..don't want it to be true...no
I want to get to the truth and the only way you get to the truth is by being critical of the evidence..I have shown clearly why this article should be questioned...you seem to be willing to accept anything without question...a bit stupid really

you seem to be willing to accept anything without question...a bit stupid really



well..............i could say the  same  about  you with  the mccs
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 27, 2013, 02:08:32 PM
you seem to be willing to accept anything without question...a bit stupid really



well..............i could say the  same  about  you with  the mccs

you have to ask   if  davel doesnt like us why does he stay on the forum?? or ignore us??
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 02:09:04 PM
you seem to be willing to accept anything without question...a bit stupid really



well..............i could say the  same  about  you with  the mccs

you could..but it wouldn't be true
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 27, 2013, 02:11:03 PM
So whats Exton doing now, who is the source for this article and how much have they been paid..

Moaning about the efits being his. Who was he supposed to be working for.

Exton and his staff are outraged. "I was totally amazed when I saw the pictures and the report on TV," the Sunday Times quoted one of them. "This is nothing new - and the phantom images are ours!"
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 02:16:50 PM
What is deeply significant here is that Scotland Yard are said to have requested a copy of the report from the authors

So it wasn't in the private investigators' file  that the McCanns gave them  ?   (  it couldn't have been,  could it  ...  if it was then SY  wouldn't have  needed  to request a copy from the authors  )

Was the report  'removed''  from the private investigators file before the McCanns handed it over to Scotland Yard  ?  ...  was it ever put  IN  the files  ? 

And those E fits of Smithman

Were  they  in the McCanns private investigators' files,  or had they been removed too ? 

Did Scotland Yard get the E fits  from the McCanns,  or from someone else  ? 

This article presents so many questions
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 27, 2013, 02:19:36 PM
What is deeply significant here is that Scotland Yard are said to have requested a copy of the report from the authors

So it wasn't in the private investigators' file  that the McCanns gave them  ?   (  it couldn't have been,  could it  ...  if it was then SY  wouldn't have  needed  to request a copy from the authors  )

Was the report  'removed''  from the private investigators file before the McCanns handed it over to Scotland Yard  ?  ...  was it ever put  IN  the files  ? 

And those E fits of Smithman

Were  they  in the McCanns private investigators' files,  or had they been removed too ? 

Did Scotland Yard get the E fits  from the McCanns,  or from someone else  ? 

This article presents so many questions

The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 02:23:30 PM
The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.

So if  Scotland Yard hadn't  got hold of that report  from it's authors,  we would  still  not have seen the Smithman E fit  ?   ...  to this day it would have remained hidden  ? 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: faithlilly on October 27, 2013, 02:23:47 PM
The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.

And ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 02:27:10 PM
What is deeply significant here is that Scotland Yard are said to have requested a copy of the report from the authors

So it wasn't in the private investigators' file  that the McCanns gave them  ?   (  it couldn't have been,  could it  ...  if it was then SY  wouldn't have  needed  to request a copy from the authors  )

Was the report  'removed''  from the private investigators file before the McCanns handed it over to Scotland Yard  ?  ...  was it ever put  IN  the files  ? 

And those E fits of Smithman

Were  they  in the McCanns private investigators' files,  or had they been removed too ? 

Did Scotland Yard get the E fits  from the McCanns,  or from someone else  ? 

This article presents so many questions
[/quote

I just have one question..how accurate is it..and why have other papers picked up on it
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 02:32:48 PM
Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund.

Why did Scotland Yard even have to ask for this report, surely the fund should have handed it over at the very start of the review !
I wonder if anything else has been conveniently swept under the carpet for being "hypercritical" !

I wonder what Scotland Yard made of that 

Information,  which they clearly now consider  crucial  to the investigation,  was kept from them ... despite the fact that the person who held the information  wanted  to pass it to them

And the reason he couldn't  ?  ...  because the McCanns lawyers were keeping him silent under threat of legal action !

This is shocking stuff
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 02:44:42 PM
Can't believe this. I'm still reeling from Crimewatch telling me the last 5 years I've spent looking for bundleman have been wasted. And now we hear K and G knew this all along! Never mind I'm sure it's Amaral's fault in some way.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 27, 2013, 02:47:19 PM
Can't believe this. I'm still reeling from Crimewatch telling me the last 5 years I've spent looking for bundleman have been wasted. And now we hear K and G knew this all along! Never mind I'm sure it's Amaral's fault in some way.

lol
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 02:50:55 PM
Can't believe this. I'm still reeling from Crimewatch telling me the last 5 years I've spent looking for bundleman have been wasted. And now we hear K and G knew this all along! Never mind I'm sure it's Amaral's fault in some way.

And it's not just that they kept the E fits of  Smithman from the public  (  and,  more importantly,  from the police  ) for five years   ...  it's that they used lawyers to make sure no-one else made them public   ( or passed them to the police  )  !
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 02:53:20 PM
I can't believe that SY had to request the info Apostate, every single piece of info which the fund had, irregardless of how significant they viewed it should have been handed to them at the start of the review.

there is every chance that this article is a complete load of rubbish... but of course don't let the truth stand in your way
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 02:59:21 PM
Do you know why the e-fits were never used?

I have no idea and as I am not privy to all the information I cant really make an informed decision.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 03:02:40 PM
I have no idea and as I am not privy to all the information I cant really make an informed decision.

So it's not just us who haven't got a clue what's happening then.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 03:06:34 PM
you are stating something as fact when there is no confirmation and every reason to question the article..no wonder you haven't got a clue about whats happening in this case

This not some  'Maddie found in Greece'  sensationalist tabloid garbage

It is a serious piece of investigative journalism, and  The Times are to be congratulated for being brave enough to run with it  ...  something,  I feel certain they would  not  have done without absolute confidence in the accuracy of the piece  (  particularly post Leveson )
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 03:11:04 PM
This not some  'Maddie found in Greece'  sensationalist tabloid garbage

It is a serious piece of investigative journalism, and  The Times are to be congratulated for being brave enough to run with it  ...  something,  I feel certain they would  not  have done without absolute confidence in the accuracy of the piece  (  particularly post Leveson )

And unless they've made up the response from the Fund "spokesman" it appears to  be true. Of course if it's all made up Carter Ruck will take News to the cleaners so we needn't worry the truth will be established.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 03:14:03 PM
This not some  'Maddie found in Greece'  sensationalist tabloid garbage

It is a serious piece of investigative journalism, and  The Times are to be congratulated for being brave enough to run with it  ...  something,  I feel certain they would  not  have done without absolute confidence in the accuracy of the piece  (  particularly post Leveson )

well it seems another story by these two cost the times half  a million
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 03:16:08 PM
well it seems another story by these two cost the times half  a million

All the more reason to be certain that the Times legal bods would have been all over this before it went to press 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 03:18:22 PM
All the more reason to be certain that the Times legal bods would have been all over this before it went to press

as I have said..lets wait and see.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 27, 2013, 03:19:43 PM
All the more reason to be certain that the Times legal bods would have been all over this before it went to press 

Murdochs vs McCanns   Don't think I'd want to be on the McCanns side in that battle.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 03:24:08 PM
Murdochs vs McCanns   Don't think I'd want to be on the McCanns side in that battle.

It would be Carter Ruck vs Murdoch and as the two reporters who wrote the article lost the last libel action they were involved in....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 27, 2013, 03:29:52 PM
It would be Carter Ruck vs Murdoch and as the two reporters who wrote the article lost the last libel action they were involved in....

I doubt he would lose any sleep over it.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 03:32:13 PM
It would be Carter Ruck vs Murdoch and as the two reporters who wrote the article lost the last libel action they were involved in....

No it would be the McCanns I don't believe Carter Ruck would suggest the article is defamatory to them.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 03:34:12 PM
No it would be the McCanns I don't believe Carter Ruck would suggest the article is defamatory to them.

yes its quite supportive of them isn't it
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 27, 2013, 03:34:48 PM
Why do you think Paulo Rebelo dropped the proceedings concerning the Smith family ?

The Smith sighting as far as Amaral was concerned, was insignificant until September 2007. He had the same description of the man in May 2007. Rebelo dodn't take over till 10/10/2007.

I may be committing a defamation crime, but I believe that Rebelo was ordered to file the case, instead of following the very important lead Amaral was following about the Smith's sighting.

Rebelo ordered by who? Amaral didn't think it was a very important lead, till he thought Martin Smith had implicated Gerry.

You can't blame Rebelo for Amarals mistakes!

Amaral was removed from the coordination but remained connected to the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: pathfinder73 on October 27, 2013, 03:50:57 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/27/madeleine-mccann-kate-gerry-mi5_n_4167645.html?utm_hp_ref=tw (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/27/madeleine-mccann-kate-gerry-mi5_n_4167645.html?utm_hp_ref=tw)

Madeleine McCann Suspect E-Fit 'Produced By Former Spies In 2008 And Suppressed By Parents'

Evidence recently presented as a "breakthrough" in the hunt for Madeleine McCann was reportedly produced for her parents by a group of former spies in 2008.

Kate and Gerry McCann hand-picked a team of former MI5 agents after becoming fed up with the pace and direction of the original Portuguese investigation.

The intelligence report was kept secret for five years as it was deemed "hyper-critical" of the McCanns and their friends, reports the Sunday Times.

The contents were only made public after Scotland Yard investigators requested a copy when conducting a fresh review of the case

E-fits of a man seen at the time of Madeleine's disappearance shown on a special edition of Crimewatch last week and presented as new evidence are in fact from the 2008 report.

Detectives also said the accepted version of events surrounding the disappearance the little girl in 2007 had "significantly changed".

One of the authors of the 2008 report said he was "utterly stunned" the evidence had been presented in such a way.

Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief, who led the group, confirmed they had been silenced by the McCanns.

He said: "A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report."

The Crimewatch appeal prompted thousands of calls from the public.

The news comes in the same week as Portugal's attorney general approved a police request to re-open the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine.

The case was shelved in 2008 leaving detectives from the UK's Metropolitan Police Service to carry on the search.

Carrie-Marie Bratley of the Portugal news told Sky News: "There are people who are extremely supportive of the McCanns, there are people who are extremely sympathetic ... and they are very much interested in this case.

She added that officers in any new investigation would have had no involvement in the initial police operation and were chosen for "their emotional and physical distance from this case in the hope that maybe they could go over it with a fine-tooth comb and come up with something, which it seems they may have done."

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 27, 2013, 04:01:08 PM
Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief, who led the group, confirmed they had been silenced by the McCanns.

He said: "A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report."


Isn't that how it should be?

Notice how much that article has changed already >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 04:03:58 PM
All the more reason to be certain that the Times legal bods would have been all over this before it went to press
Sure.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 04:08:22 PM

He said: "A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report."[/b]
Their contract likely had a clause of confidentiality. Under which terms can the letter of a lawyer bind to confidentiality ?
How did that report come into SY's hands ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 04:08:30 PM
A sensational story IF TRUE

Yet no other paper has repeated it yet...sky news..bbc news..itv news
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 04:14:08 PM
A sensational story IF TRUE

Yet no other paper has repeated it yet...sky news..bbc news..itv news

there is a quote at the end of the article from the Find Madeleine Foundation. Surly they must have known about the article to comment on it?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 04:15:08 PM
A sensational story IF TRUE

Yet no other paper has repeated it yet...sky news..bbc news..itv news

That's hardly surprising, bearing in mind the their 'favourable ' reporting of the Mccanns.

Ir true, the Mccanns have been exposed for what they are.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: pathfinder73 on October 27, 2013, 04:15:36 PM
Smithman knows all the answers. Best to keep him hidden. It's up to SY to prove his identity.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 04:22:18 PM
there is a quote at the end of the article from the Find Madeleine Foundation. Surly they must have known about the article to comment on it?

It is difficult to explain to someone whose mind is so closed that they are unwilling to look at things in a completely open and critical way...this quote..if genuine came in reply to what question or prompt... we don't know

It still has not been reported in other newspapers..posters on other forums believe the Times have been duped..its happened before..halligan...master conman has been released from prison...where is he
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 04:24:19 PM
whatever the merits of the article the McCanns having the e-fits for years and not using them takes some explaining
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 04:25:47 PM
whatever the merits of the article the McCanns having the e-fits for years and not using them takes some explaining

looks like someone has started  to back pedal already
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 04:26:44 PM
looks like someone has started  to back pedal already

Nope.

Have the McCanns had the e-fits for years? Yes or no?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 27, 2013, 04:31:02 PM
to be honest I don't believe a word of it...sy wouldn't be saying what they are if that times article is true..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 04:33:15 PM
to be honest I don't believe a word of it...sy wouldn't be saying what they are if that times article is true..

Perhaps it is possible they didn't know and if they didn't it makes them look rather foolish, does it not ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 04:35:28 PM
It is difficult to explain to someone whose mind is so closed that they are unwilling to look at things in a completely open and critical way...this quote..if genuine came in reply to what question or prompt... we don't know

It still has not been reported in other newspapers..posters on other forums believe the Times have been duped..its happened before..halligan...master conman has been released from prison...where is he

I assume that we will only know for sure, if and when the mccanns sue. How long should we give them do you think? If they haven't released a statement refuting this by the end of the day? The week? The year?

I'm honestly trying to understand your cryptic posts, I know Halligan is a crook, I accept that it's possible that The Times have been duped (though I doubt that), what I'm asking is how long do we wait for the Mccans or their spokesman to make a statement refuting it before we decide if it's true or not?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 04:37:59 PM
to be honest I don't believe a word of it...sy wouldn't be saying what they are if that times article is true..

They would if their lawyers tell them to.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 04:51:25 PM
This is a little off topic, but I was searching Google to see if anyone other than The Times and the Huffington Post had commented about the hidden e-fits and I came across this:

http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/McCanns-outraged-e-fits/story-12376337-detail/story.html

I love irony....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 27, 2013, 04:54:26 PM
This is a little off topic, but I was searching Google to see if anyone other than The Times and the Huffington Post had commented about the hidden e-fits and I came across this:

http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/McCanns-outraged-e-fits/story-12376337-detail/story.html

I love irony....

It's only ironic if the Sunday Times story is written on two tablets - and we don't know that yet.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 04:54:59 PM
This is a little off topic, but I was searching Google to see if anyone other than The Times and the Huffington Post had commented about the hidden e-fits and I came across this:

http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/McCanns-outraged-e-fits/story-12376337-detail/story.html

I love irony....
?{)(**
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 04:55:13 PM
I assume that we will only know for sure, if and when the mccanns sue. How long should we give them do you think? If they haven't released a statement refuting this by the end of the day? The week? The year?

I'm honestly trying to understand your cryptic posts, I know Halligan is a crook, I accept that it's possible that The Times have been duped (though I doubt that), what I'm asking is how long do we wait for the Mccans or their spokesman to make a statement refuting it before we decide if it's true or not?

I cant see that something like this ..if true...will not be further discussed in the media..we should have some indication in the next few days
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 27, 2013, 04:55:23 PM
Tablets in the biblical sense, not the electronic....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 04:55:42 PM
No denial from Clarence.

Have the McCanns known about the e-fits for years?  Yes or no?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 04:57:43 PM
It's only ironic if the Sunday Times story is written on two tablets - and we don't know that yet.
What does this mean, please SH ? Like the 10 commandments ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 04:59:38 PM
No denial from Clarence.

Have the McCanns known about the e-fits for years?  Yes or no?
I have no idea where these e fits have been for 5 years but I would not believe that the McCanns would have hidden them..just my opinion
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 27, 2013, 05:00:28 PM
What does this mean, please SH ? Like the 10 commandments ?

I know it's a disturbing concept for the Nietzchean, but not all written sources are created equal.

If the Sunday Times is printing the truth in this story, we'll hear about it from other sources.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 05:00:56 PM
I cant see that something like this ..if true...will not be further discussed in the media..we should have some indication in the next few days

Some stories are told by only one newspaper, for years in some cases, before becoming mainstream. The Guardian and phone hacking, for one. Why do you think that is? It's not because they aren't true.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:01:18 PM
I have no idea where these e fits have been for 5 years but I would not believe that the McCanns would have hidden them..just my opinion
I don't believe that either. If they didn't like them, they could just destroy them.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 05:01:32 PM
I have no idea where these e fits have been for 5 years but I would not believe that the McCanns would have hidden them..just my opinion

but did they know about them? They were obtained by their detectives.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 05:03:40 PM
but did they know about them? They were obtained by their detectives.

I would rather wait till we have more information
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 05:03:57 PM
I don't believe that either. If they didn't like them, they could just destroy them.

They would not have had the only copies.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 05:04:38 PM
I don't believe that either. If they didn't like them, they could just destroy them.

No, Anne. That's what Richard Nixon did, and ever since people haven't been that stupid.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 05:04:45 PM
I don't believe that either. If they didn't like them, they could just destroy them.

They may have done Anne, SY had to get these from the authors of the report. If there were copies, they didn't destroy them all, hence the letter enforcing confidentiality.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:05:09 PM
I know it's a disturbing concept for the Nietzchean, but not all written sources are created equal.

If the Sunday Times is printing the truth in this story, we'll hear about it from other sources.
A disturbing concept for the Nietzschean ?
I was just asking the meaning of that expression and, as the 10 commandments were on two tablets, I thought it could be the origin of a current (?) idiomatic expression.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 05:05:34 PM
I would rather wait till we have more information

I'm eagerly awaiting Clarence's denial. I've spent 5 years looking for bundleman and I'd hate to think I should have been looking for someone else.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:07:31 PM
They may have done Anne, SY had to get these from the authors of the report. If there were copies, they didn't destroy them all, hence the letter enforcing confidentiality.
You're probably right and I'm very naive. But those e-fits seem to me so innocuous..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 05:08:02 PM
It would be interesting to hear Mr. Redwood's opinion on this.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 05:09:28 PM
I haven't read through asll the posts here, but the full article is available on the amazon forum currently discussing the case.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 05:10:01 PM
You're probably right and I'm very naive. But those e-fits seem to me so innocuous..

Remember Clarence's Cooperman news conference - there was plenty of time and money to publicise this red-herring. Why no publicity for the Smith e-fits?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:15:18 PM
I'm eagerly awaiting Clarence's denial. I've spent 5 years looking for bundleman and I'd hate to think I should have been looking for someone else.
Have you really looked for a faceless guy ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 27, 2013, 05:16:45 PM
A disturbing concept for the Nietzschean ?
I was just asking the meaning of that expression and, as the 10 commandments were on two tablets, I thought it could be the origin of a current (?) idiomatic expression.

Sorry to have been so flippant, Anne. What I meant was that the Nietzschean does not acknowledge the existence of any kind of Truth, with an upper case 'T'.

Two tablets, or tablets of stone, are very old expressions as far as I know, referring to the Ten Commandments.

I just meant that as far as sources go, the Sunday Times can hardly be compared to Mount Sinai..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 05:17:37 PM
Incidentally this article, if not true, could have been stopped with an injunction. It's not as if the McCanns don't have the legal clout to do this.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:18:18 PM
Remember Clarence's Cooperman news conference - there was plenty of time and money to publicise this red-herring. Why no publicity for the Smith e-fits?
I wonder why, because they could be any one if they weren't two, a fact that turns them into  nobody's face.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 27, 2013, 05:19:15 PM
Incidentally this article, if not true, could have been stopped with an injunction. It's not as if the McCanns don't have the legal clout to do this.

Interesting point.

Though McCann legal bills must be running pretty high at the moment.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 05:20:03 PM
Incidentally this article, if not true, could have been stopped with an injunction. It's not as if the McCanns don't have the legal clout to do this.

Precisely.

Carter Ruck do have a considerable clout, that is well known.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 05:20:16 PM
Interesting point.

Though McCann legal bills must be running pretty high at the moment.

in her book Kate says Carter Ruck do work for them for nothing
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 05:20:40 PM
Incidentally this article, if not true, could have been stopped with an injunction. It's not as if the McCanns don't have the legal clout to do this.

they would have had to know about it first
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:21:43 PM
Sorry to have been so flippant, Anne. What I meant was that the Nietzschean does not acknowledge the existence of any kind of Truth, with an upper case 'T'.

Two tablets, or tablets of stone, are very old expressions as far as I know, referring to the Ten Commandments.

I just meant that as far as sources go, the Sunday Times can hardly be compared to Mount Sinai..
Thank you for confirming my intuition was right.
About the truth with T, yes, let's laugh and dance !
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 05:22:26 PM
they would have had to know about it first

They would have to know about it - the paper would have contacted them (or lawyers) for comment. Of that you can be 100% certain.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 27, 2013, 05:23:07 PM
Thank you for confirming my intuition was right.
About the truth with T, yes, let's laugh and dance !

A child is missing, if the article is true, it means a possible means of finding her was surpressed.

Laugh it up Anne, get out your dancing shoes and  celebrate.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:23:17 PM
they would have had to know about it first
Isn't that part of PR job ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 05:24:28 PM
they would have had to know about it first

They know about it now and still now rebuttal....

The article also mentioned lie detector tests. It didn't specify who had taken them though. I'd love to know whether that was the reason for the Mccanns agreeing to do lie detector tests then backing out.....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 05:24:31 PM
Remember Clarence's Cooperman news conference - there was plenty of time and money to publicise this red-herring. Why no publicity for the Smith e-fits?

Mitchell's Cooperman splash was January 2008, nearly a year before they had these e-fits it seems.

But the one he did with Edgar about the 'suspiciously behaving' woman in Barcelona(!) was certainly after November 2008. He could have used the e-fits then couldn't he.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:24:54 PM
A child is missing, if the article is true, it means a possible means of finding her was surpressed.

Laugh it up Anne, get out your dancing shoes and  celebrate.
There's a misunderstanding, here. SH and I weren't referring to the truth about Madeleine McCann.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 27, 2013, 05:25:36 PM
There's a misunderstanding, here. SY and I weren't referring to the truth about Madeleine McCann.

No misunderstanding.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 05:26:17 PM
I can't believe what I am reading - I thought the clocks only went back by an hour today - things like:

If they don't sue - it must be true

If they don't deny - it cannot be a lie

If they are not Rucked - they are not f---d

Were repeated with so much glee and back slapping years ago.

Doe anyone remember the old has been duffer from Essex who used to use those phrases and permutations of them?

He spent many a happy hour in the High Court making a complete fool of himself.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 27, 2013, 05:27:09 PM
So he did.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 05:27:19 PM
I can't believe what I am reading - I thought the clocks only went back by an hour today - things like:

If they don't sue - it must be true

If they don't deny - it cannot be a lie

If they are not Rucked - they are not f---d

Were repeated with so much glee and back slapping years ago.

Doe anyone remember the old has been duffer from Essex who used to use those phrases and permutations of them?

He spent many a happy hour in the High Court making a complete fool of himself.

He wrote books 8(0(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:27:53 PM
Mitchell's Cooperman splash was January 2008, nearly a year before they had these e-fits it seems.

But the one he did with Edgar about the 'suspiciously behaving' woman in Barcelona(!) was certainly after November 2008. He could have used the e-fits then couldn't he.
We don't know whether Edgar had these e-fits in his pocket when he was in the Algarve.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 05:28:14 PM
He wrote books 8(0(*

He sold books.

The clue is in the second word.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 27, 2013, 05:28:35 PM
I can't believe what I am reading - I thought the clocks only went back by an hour today - things like:

If they don't sue - it must be true

If they don't deny - it cannot be a lie

If they are not Rucked - they are not f---d

Were repeated with so much glee and back slapping years ago.

Doe anyone remember the old has been duffer from Essex who used to use those phrases and permutations of them?

He spent many a happy hour in the High Court making a complete fool of himself.


combover!!! @)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 05:29:00 PM
I can't believe what I am reading - I thought the clocks only went back by an hour today - things like:

If they don't sue - it must be true

If they don't deny - it cannot be a lie

If they are not Rucked - they are not f---d

Were repeated with so much glee and back slapping years ago.

Doe anyone remember the old has been duffer from Essex who used to use those phrases and permutations of them?

He spent many a happy hour in the High Court making a complete fool of himself.

Are you seriously suggesting that the Mccans will not denounce this is it's not true?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 27, 2013, 05:30:05 PM
Is this Extons problem?

The McCanns were also understandably wary of Oakley after allegations that the chairman, Kevin Halligen, failed to pass on money paid by the fund to Exton’s team. Halligen denies this. He was later convicted of fraud in an unrelated case in the US.

So who's lying Exton or Halligen?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 05:30:15 PM
I wonder how many people have signed up for subscriptions to the sunday times today
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 05:30:40 PM
We don't know whether Edgar had these e-fits in his pocket when he wasin the Algarve.


What was stopping them giving the e-fits to the media? Clarence is hardly shy and retiring - and they eagerly print everything else he gives them.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:33:16 PM
He sold books.

The clue is in the second word.
What is the point to write books if nobody reads them ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 05:33:47 PM
What is the point to write books if nobody reads them ?

money
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:40:00 PM
money
You're kidding. Why people would buy books if not to read them ? To burn them and get warm in winter ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 05:43:04 PM
You're kidding. Why people would buy books if not to read them ? To burn them and get warm in winter ?

I have never bought a book for those reasons
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 27, 2013, 05:43:47 PM
You're kidding. Why people would buy books if not to read them ? To burn them and get warm in winter ?

You asked (and I'll paraphrase) "what would be the point of writing books". The reply was "to make money".
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 05:57:44 PM
I pointed that out earlier.

I am not prepared to check the original against the edited version.

sorry.. I missed it..im lost for words again
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 05:58:06 PM
You asked (and I'll paraphrase) "what would be the point of writing books". The reply was "to make money".
Please don't truncate sentences.
Making money writing books ? Only a few people.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 05:58:34 PM
Davel has put the conspiracy hunting hat on.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 06:05:18 PM
http://www.bild.de/news/ausland/maddie-mccann/fall-maddie-mccann-hinweise-jahrelang-vertuscht-33145312.bild.html (http://www.bild.de/news/ausland/maddie-mccann/fall-maddie-mccann-hinweise-jahrelang-vertuscht-33145312.bild.html)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 06:09:23 PM
Here is the article as it was posted by Imustpointout

The new prime suspect was first singled out by detectives in 2008. Their findings were suppressed. Insight reports
The Sunday Times Insight team Published: 27 October 2013
Comment (0) Print
Madeleine disappeared from the Praia da Luz resort in May 2007Madeleine disappeared from the Praia da Luz resort in May 2007 (Adrian Sheratt)
THE critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.

The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.

It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard.

A team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by the McCanns to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine.


Click to enlarge
10 months after the three-year-old had disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz, and the McCanns were beginning to despair over the handling of the local police investigation. They were relying on the new team to bring fresh hope.

But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public. Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

They found that it contained new evidence about a key suspect seen carrying a child away from the McCanns’ holiday apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared.

This sighting is now considered the main lead in the investigation and E-Fits of the suspect, taken from the report, were the centrepiece of a Crimewatch appeal that attracted more than 2,400 calls from the public this month.

One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.

The team of investigators from the security firm Oakley International were hired by the McCanns’ Find Madeleine fund, which bankrolled private investigations into the girl’s disappearance. They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

Their report, seen by The Sunday Times, focused on a sighting by an Irish family of a man carrying a child at about 10pm on May 3, 2007, when Madeleine went missing.

An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.

Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund.

A source close to the fund said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if it became public.

Kate and Gerry McCann: now officially not suspects, say the Portuguese authorities Kate and Gerry McCann: now officially not suspects, say the Portuguese authorities (Adrian Sheratt) Oakley’s six-month investigation included placing undercover agents inside the Ocean Club where the family stayed, lie detector tests, covert surveillance and a forensic re-examination of all existing evidence.

It was immediately clear that two sightings of vital importance had been reported to the police. Two men were seen carrying children near the apartments between 9pm, when Madeleine was last seen by Gerry, and 10pm, when Kate discovered her missing.

The first man was seen at 9.15pm by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns, who had been dining with them at the tapas bar in the resort. She saw a man carrying a girl just yards from the apartment as she went to check on her children.

The second sighting was by Martin Smith and his family from Ireland, who saw a man carrying a child near the apartment just before 10pm.

The earlier Tanner sighting had always been treated as the most significant, but the Oakley team controversially poured cold water on her account.

Instead, they focused on the Smith sighting, travelling to Ireland to interview the family and produce E-Fits of the man they saw. Their report said the Smiths were “helpful and sincere” and concluded: “The Smith sighting is credible evidence of a sighting of Maddie and more credible than Jane Tanner’s sighting”. The evidence had been “neglected for too long” and an “overemphasis placed on Tanner”.

The new focus shifted the believed time-line of the abduction back by 45 minutes.

The pictures of a man who may have taken Madeleine were drawn up in 2008The pictures of a man who may have taken Madeleine were drawn up in 2008 (Adrian Sheratt) The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised timeline should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.

The potential abductor seen by the Smiths is now the prime suspect in Scotland Yard’s investigation, after detectives established that the man seen earlier by Tanner was almost certainly a father carrying his child home from a nearby night creche. The Smith E-Fits were the centrepiece of the Crimewatch appeal.

One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new time-line and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said.

The detailed images of the face of the man seen by the Smith family were never released by the McCanns. But an artist’s impression of the man seen earlier by Tanner was widely promoted, even though the face had to be left blank because she had only seen him fleetingly and from a distance.

Various others images of lone men spotted hanging around the resort at other times were also released.

Nor were the Smith E-Fits included in Kate McCann’s 2011 book, Madeleine, which contained a whole section on eight “key sightings” and identified those of the Smiths and Tanner as most “crucial”. Descriptions of all seven other sightings were accompanied by an E-Fit or artist’s impression. The Smiths’ were the only exception. So why was such a “crucial” piece of evidence kept under lock and key?

The relationship between the fund and Oakley was already souring by the time the report was submitted — and its findings could only have made matters worse.

As well as questioning parts of the McCanns’ evidence, it contained sensitive information about Madeleine’s sleeping patterns and raised the highly sensitive possibility that she could have died in an accident after leaving the apartment herself from one of two unsecured doors.

There was also an uncomfortable complication with Smith’s account. He had originally told the police that he had “recognised something” about the way Gerry McCann carried one of his children which reminded him of the man he had seen in Praia da Luz.

Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.

The McCanns were also understandably wary of Oakley after allegations that the chairman, Kevin Halligen, failed to pass on money paid by the fund to Exton’s team. Halligen denies this. He was later convicted of fraud in an unrelated case in the US.

The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.

He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.

“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.

A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.

It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”

Insight: Heidi Blake and Jonathan Calvert
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 06:10:21 PM
Why would you make such a zenophobic comment?

It was a reference to Fawlty Towers, and it's spelt with an 'x' not a 'z'.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 06:11:38 PM
Please God - not spelling correction time again.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 06:14:44 PM
Why would you make such a zenophobic comment?

What's xenophobic about it? Re-read it. Then if you're still having trouble, get someone with a sense of humour to explain it to you.

...edit... I see Stephen already has....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 06:15:17 PM
What are their PR and lawyers doing ?
http://ukpaedos-exposed.com/why-did-the-mccanns-suppress-vital-evidence/
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Mr Moderator on October 27, 2013, 06:15:48 PM
Please God - not spelling correction time again.

 @)(++(*  @)(++(*  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 06:37:23 PM
E-fit about the house?

 8((()*/ @)(++(* @)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on October 27, 2013, 06:41:53 PM
Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund.

Why did Scotland Yard even have to ask for this report, surely the fund should have handed it over at the very start of the review !
I wonder if anything else has been conveniently swept under the carpet for being "hypercritical" !

If the Met had to ask the authors for a copy, a question might be whether the the McCanns ever had a full copy to hand over.

The "hypercritical" aspects seem to be nothing more than what is in the files, which the Met would have been aware of anyway. 

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 06:46:00 PM

So to get things back on track, why haven't the Mccanns or their spokes person rebutted this article if it is in fact untrue?
It's not always smart to deny what is after all as vague as a rumour. I remember the forced, broken, jemmied shutters. There was a denying on the 4th end of the day by John Hill. But for months tabloids repeated that rumour.
Naughty journalists would now relate this refusal of disclosure, supported by lawyers, to the refusal of reconstruction, also supported by lawyers.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 06:46:08 PM
If the Met had to ask the authors for a copy, a question might be whether the the McCanns ever had a full copy to hand over.

The "hypercritical" aspects seem to be nothing more than what is in the files, which the Met would have been aware of anyway.

how did the met know that authors had a copy ...who told them
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 06:47:57 PM
Did the bitter PIs ever get their money?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: faithlilly on October 27, 2013, 06:55:28 PM
A recent article from the Telegraph regarding the efits :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html

" Instead, detectives are now focusing their efforts on a second man seen carrying a child towards the beach just minutes before Kate McCann went to check on Madeleine. An Irishman, Martin Smith, and his wife reported seeing him at the time. Their e-fits, which have only now been released, were originally produced by a private detective agency which was hired by the McCanns in 2008 when they became dissatisfied with the Portuguese police inquiry.

At the time, though, it was not published, partly because Portuguese detectives thought the other theory more viable, and partly because Mr Smith himself said he thought the man he had seen looked like Gerry McCann, whom several other witnesses had already said had been at the restaurant table at that point.

Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 07:01:12 PM
A recent article from the Telegraph regarding the efits :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html

" Instead, detectives are now focusing their efforts on a second man seen carrying a child towards the beach just minutes before Kate McCann went to check on Madeleine. An Irishman, Martin Smith, and his wife reported seeing him at the time. Their e-fits, which have only now been released, were originally produced by a private detective agency which was hired by the McCanns in 2008 when they became dissatisfied with the Portuguese police inquiry.
At the time, though, it was not published, partly because Portuguese detectives thought the other theory more viable, and partly because Mr Smith himself said he thought the man he had seen looked like Gerry McCann, whom several other witnesses had already said had been at the restaurant table at that point.
Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."

So this article is saying the e fit was handed to the Portuguese police at the time.....  and then  handed to the met two years ago..which article do we believe
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 07:01:35 PM
A recent article from the Telegraph regarding the efits :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html

" Instead, detectives are now focusing their efforts on a second man seen carrying a child towards the beach just minutes before Kate McCann went to check on Madeleine. An Irishman, Martin Smith, and his wife reported seeing him at the time. Their e-fits, which have only now been released, were originally produced by a private detective agency which was hired by the McCanns in 2008 when they became dissatisfied with the Portuguese police inquiry.
At the time, though, it was not published, partly because Portuguese detectives thought the other theory more viable, and partly because Mr Smith himself said he thought the man he had seen looked like Gerry McCann, whom several other witnesses had already said had been at the restaurant table at that point.
Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."

That may well be a 'family source' with One Foot in the Mouth.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 07:05:43 PM
That may well be a 'family source' with One Foot in the Mouth.

They didn't complain at the time. I'm interested in why the McCanns didn't publicise it - after all they showed e-fits/impressions of everyone else.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 07:10:40 PM
They didn't complain at the time. I'm interested in why the McCanns didn't publicise it - after all they showed e-fits/impressions of everyone else.

I notice your bold indignation from earlier today has mellowed.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 07:12:01 PM
I believe a lot of people will have a lot of egg on their faces today - breakfast egg on the day that another hour has been added to their blissful ignorance.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 07:16:11 PM
They didn't complain at the time. I'm interested in why the McCanns didn't publicise it - after all they showed e-fits/impressions of everyone else.

You're right. For some reason 10pm is a time they didn't want people to think about. >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 07:18:07 PM
cariad said

As I posted the original unedited article - would you like to amend your post and apologise.

Nope. seriously, do you guys purposely misunderstand everything?

I'm bored of the lets deflect game.

Can we play, why have the Mccanns suppressed important information for 5 years now please?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 27, 2013, 07:18:38 PM
Quote from the full article.

Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.
End quote

I'v never heard that claim made before.   Interesting.


Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 07:20:33 PM
Smith
You're right. For some reason 10pm is a time they didn't want people to think about. >@@(*&)

To misquote Fawlty Towers: "Don't mention the Smith sighting!"

We all know why it worries them - but to have laboured bundleman for 5 years when their own guys told them to drop it. Incredible. 5 years wasted. More than ever the "search" seems insincere.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 07:23:40 PM
Nope. seriously, do you guys purposely misunderstand everything?

I'm bored of the lets deflect game.

Can we play, why have the Mccanns suppressed important information for 5 years now please?

according to the telegraph article several posts above..no..so you believe  what you want to believe but please don't post it as fact
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Victoria on October 27, 2013, 07:26:26 PM
I can't believe what I am reading - I thought the clocks only went back by an hour today - things like:

If they don't sue - it must be true

If they don't deny - it cannot be a lie

If they are not Rucked - they are not f---d

Were repeated with so much glee and back slapping years ago.

Doe anyone remember the old has been duffer from Essex who used to use those phrases and permutations of them?

He spent many a happy hour in the High Court making a complete fool of himself.

Ah ha ha! Yes he did, didn't he. Same old same old. When will these idiots learn.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 07:27:24 PM
Quote
"frankly it should have been out there a long time ago"

Why wasn't it then, Clarence?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 07:27:28 PM
To misquote Fawlty Towers: "Don't mention the Smith sighting!"

We all know why it worries them - but to have laboured bundleman for 5 years when their own guys told them to drop it. Incredible. 5 years wasted. More than ever the "search" seems insincere.

It's a puzzle Apostate, but after Crimewatch every single paper didn't bother asking the question about the new e-fits, not even the Express and Star. But they surely can't avoid the question now can they?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 07:28:10 PM
Ah ha ha! Yes he did, didn't he. Same old same old. When will these idiots learn.

based on the posts weve seen today..no
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 27, 2013, 07:29:35 PM
based on the posts weve seen today..no

You can't answer the question either, so we've every right to discuss it and the rest of this article.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 07:33:26 PM
Nope. seriously, do you guys purposely misunderstand everything?

I'm bored of the lets deflect game.

Can we play, why have the Mccanns suppressed important information for 5 years now please?

I posted the original article. What game was I playing?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 07:34:23 PM
according to the telegraph article several posts above..no..so you believe  what you want to believe but please don't post it as fact

The Telegraph quoted a source close to the Mccanns, The Times published a statement attributed to The Madeleine foundation*.

I trust the paper with the named source, how about you?


....edit *The find Madeleine fund! Thanks Apostate !
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 07:35:56 PM
The Telegraph quoted a source close to the Mccanns, The Times published a statement attributed to The Madeleine foundation.

I trust the paper with the named source, how about you?

To be honest I don't think it was them LOL
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 07:37:01 PM
You can't answer the question either, so we've every right to discuss it and the rest of this article.

never said you didn't have the right..just pointing out that the article may not be true
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 07:41:46 PM
never said you didn't have the right..just pointing out that the article may not be true

Now if it is, then what do you say ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 07:42:31 PM
The Telegraph quoted a source close to the Mccanns, The Times published a statement attributed to The Madeleine foundation*.

I trust the paper with the named source, how about you?


....edit *The find Madeleine fund! Thanks Apostate !

The madeleine fund is not a named source
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 07:43:48 PM
Now if it is, then what do you say ?

I probably wont be able to speak because Ill be eating my hat
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 07:44:48 PM
never said you didn't have the right..just pointing out that the article may not be true

I don't think anyone is arguing that a newspaper article is definitely, undoubtedly true! It seems like it's probably true though!

I honestly don't think it can be a complete fabrication, simply cause the McCanns are so litigious. I asked you earlier, but you may have missed it in the speed this thread moves, how long before we accept it as fact?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 07:46:23 PM
cariad

Quote
I don't think anyone is arguing that a newspaper article is definitely, undoubtedly true! It seems like it's probably true though!

lol lol
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 07:46:58 PM
The madeleine fund is not a named source

There is a statement from the Madeleine Fund. It's the last two paragraphs of the article.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 07:49:06 PM
There is a statement from the Madeleine Fund. It's the last two paragraphs of the article.

It's hardly surprising no one individual wants to put their name to it - not exactly a moment of glory.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 07:50:07 PM
There is a statement from the Madeleine Fund. It's the last two paragraphs of the article.

Saying the quote is from the fund is vague and no better than a source close to the family,,it doesn't say who, from the madeleine fund
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 07:51:09 PM
Quote
A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.

It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”

this is now doubted because no-one wants to put their name to it.

It is possibly from a friend close to.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 07:51:55 PM
There is a statement from the Madeleine Fund. It's the last two paragraphs of the article.

If they have a quote why not give the name
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 07:54:42 PM
furthermore..what was this quote on response to...it doesn't say...full of holes
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 07:55:33 PM
If they have a quote why not give the name

Probably because he asked them not to.  Under the circumstances who can blame him.

Still the Fund can always correct it, if they wish. Don't hold your breath.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 07:56:51 PM
Probably because he asked them not to.  Under the circumstances who can blame him.

Still the Fund can always correct it, if they wish. Don't hold your breath.

furthermore..what was this quote on response to...it doesn't say...full of holes
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 27, 2013, 07:59:43 PM
From Faiths post. The Telegraph

By Colin Freeman

10:55PM BST 19 Oct 2013

Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 08:02:02 PM
From Faiths post. The Telegraph

By Colin Freeman

10:55PM BST 19 Oct 2013

Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."

there you are ... so is this person telling lies
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 08:02:20 PM
why is red allowed to post stupid graphics?

is it a cartoon forum now?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 08:04:32 PM
From Faiths post. The Telegraph

By Colin Freeman

10:55PM BST 19 Oct 2013

Now the later sighting is being taken seriously. While DCI Redwood stressed that it could be a yet another innocent holidaymaker carrying his child, it is the key public line of inquiry, if only because of the absence of anything else. Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago."

Yeah? why wasn't it released in the files then?


.....Edited out a statement that can not be easily backed up......
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 08:06:11 PM
cariad

Quote
I thought we'd established that the PJ never had them!

really?

Who is "we"?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 08:06:52 PM
why is red allowed to post stupid graphics?

is it a cartoon forum now?

Why is imustpointout allowed to disrupt every thread with petty, pointless and provocative comments?

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 08:07:29 PM
Yeah? why wasn't it released in the files then?

I thought we'd established that the PJ never had them!

Who established the pj never had then

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 27, 2013, 08:09:17 PM
Yeah? why wasn't it released in the files then?

I thought we'd established that the PJ never had them!

You better ask the PJ. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it" Probably went on Paiva's NR box.

Have we? You might think you have!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 08:10:00 PM
Who established the pj never had then

I'll retract that part of the statement as I can't be bothered going through old threads to find the relevant posts.#

I'll leave "why weren't they in the PJ files though?"
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: faithlilly on October 27, 2013, 08:11:10 PM
there you are ... so is this person telling lies

I think this person is definitely being dishonest as the official files and the Sunday a Times article proves.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 08:11:52 PM
Why is imustpointout allowed to disrupt every thread with petty, pointless and provocative comments?

Please tell me how many threads I am currently disrupting.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 27, 2013, 08:13:06 PM
Quote
the Sunday a Times article proves

oh really - some people have lost all sense of reality.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 27, 2013, 08:13:22 PM
why is red allowed to post stupid graphics?

is it a cartoon forum now?

stupid? Thats quite subjective....a graphic from me is no different from a post from you..it conveys a message, stop whinging wont you lol
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 08:17:24 PM
I'll retract that part of the statement as I can't be bothered going through old threads to find the relevant posts.#

I'll leave "why weren't they in the PJ files though?"
when were the files released
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 27, 2013, 08:17:58 PM
Who established the pj never had then

Dont YOU have to establish that the PJ WERE given them? To bolster your argument? Do you have any evidence they were? NO you dont, because they never were, and were never given to anyone at all,they were suppressed, simple as that! As confirmed in the times report today, the PIS were gagged from revealing their report which contained the efits.....to anyone under threat of legal action! Smell the COFFEE dear.......the  Mccanns suppressed these efits in 2008 and fast forward to 2013 after a 6m quid review by SY and whatever they had to do to get hold of them, the  efits are so important, couldnt make it up could you


Edited


I prefer to believe  C4 news and their correspondents to get to the truth rather than some paid professional liar


!
 8((()*/



Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 08:23:52 PM
davel, what about now?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10407664/Madeleine-McCann-critical-new-evidence-is-from-five-year-old-suppressed-report.html
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on October 27, 2013, 08:32:15 PM
Oh dear the Telegraph and the Sunday Times.

Lets hope the journalistic might of the highly esteemed Daily Star can help them out of this crises.

N
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 08:32:29 PM
davel, what about now?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10407664/Madeleine-McCann-critical-new-evidence-is-from-five-year-old-suppressed-report.html

if you read the telegraph article it is exactly as I expected.. the telegraph makes no claims...it simply says ....evidence supressed by parents claims sunday times...which is true... Im sure the mcCanns cannot ignore this now.I hope more papers pick up on it
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 27, 2013, 08:34:38 PM
davel, what about now?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10407664/Madeleine-McCann-critical-new-evidence-is-from-five-year-old-suppressed-report.html


This cant be hushed so expect MSM to trickle through with this disgraceful at best episode....

Worms turned somewhere I think now, its utterly fraudulent and disgraceful whats come to light today..shocking, will leave  the apologists to chew the carpets or whitewash it all away, good luck though LOL
 @)(++(*

>>>



Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 27, 2013, 08:38:14 PM

This cant be hushed so expect MSM to trickle through with this disgraceful at best episode....

Worms turned somewhere I think now, its utterly fraudulent and disgraceful whats come to light today..shocking, will leave  the apologists to chew the carpets or whitewash it all away, good luck though LOL
 @)(++(*

>>>

Indeed, the attempts at whitewash are very transparent.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 27, 2013, 08:43:37 PM
why is red allowed to post stupid graphics?

is it a cartoon forum now?

Seeing as you managed to get the mods to delete my gif which was very funny and descriptive, until you had kittens over it,  let me say what was in it in words in the caption


I am the elephant in the room but no one can see me
 8((()*/

the elephant you  and others are trying to move in this case and failing miserably, have fun


Oh dear poor benita accusing c4 investigators now of having agendas  LOL hey ho , zzzzz
 8)-)))



batten down gales are coming tonight

Nite dear
 8((()*/

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on October 27, 2013, 08:53:26 PM
It all appears to have gone rather quiet - maybe davel and the gang are busy watching X factor?

N
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 08:56:11 PM
It all appears to have gone rather quiet - maybe davel and the gang are busy watching X factor?

N

No Im a Jake Bugg fan so don't think much of x factor
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 08:59:12 PM
The Find Madeleine fund said all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine "has been fully acted upon where necessary" and passed on to Scotland Yard.

Evidently not correct seeing as SY had to contact the authors of the report i.e. Oakley International !

depends who you want to believe
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 09:03:36 PM
seems  like Portuguese .......have already done there own reconstruction






http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/439464/Portuguese-police-held-their-own-Madeleine-McCann-reconstruction
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 09:04:48 PM
seems  like Portuguese .......have already done there own reconstruction






http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/439464/Portuguese-police-held-their-own-Madeleine-McCann-reconstruction

yes and are investigating an abduction
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 09:05:34 PM
Oh dear the Telegraph and the Sunday Times.

Lets hope the journalistic might of the highly esteemed Daily Star can help them out of this crises.


No doubt Clarence has plenty of "Maddie held by gypsies" stories to help them out.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 27, 2013, 09:10:45 PM
seems  like Portuguese .......have already done there own reconstruction

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/439464/Portuguese-police-held-their-own-Madeleine-McCann-reconstruction

 8((()*/

Portuguese police held their own Madeleine McCann reconstruction

A RECONSTRUCTION by Portuguese detectives of key events on the day Madeleine McCann went missing has helped persuade the country's legal offi-cials to re-open the case, we reveal today.

By: James Murray
Published: Sun, October 27, 2013

The reconstruction helped persuade legal officials to re-open the investigation [PA]
 
The detectives, who have been reviewing the case files for two years, went to Praia da Luz on the Algarve a month ago to pursue secret inquiries.

They spent hours walking around the Ocean Club working out where certain people were seen at particular times and at Apartment 5a, from where threeyear-old Madeleine went missing on May 3, 2007.

The exercise was the culmination of months of work by four Portuguese detectives based in Porto in the north of the country, who are directly working for the highly respected senior officer Helen Monteiro, an expert on abduction cases.

It is thought her elite team of dedicated officers has recently been concentrating on statements from witnesses who say they saw unknown people acting suspiciously in the resort around the time the child was missed. The work in Luz came before Scotland Yard released photofits of potential suspects on the BBC's Crimewatch show this month.

Madeleine McCann went missing from this apartment in 2007 [EXPRESS NEWSPAPERS]
 
Often there are almost perfect crimes and not all of them are discovered all over the world

Paula Teixeira da Cruz, Portuguese Justice Minister
 
Ms Monteiro has insisted all her officers work in absolute secrecy to prevent leaks of their inquiries. It was decided officers in Porto should conduct the review as none had any direct involvement in the first Madeleine McCann investigation and would therefore approach the case with fresh eyes and open minds.

In Portugal, Ms Monteiro is seen as the driving force finally to get the Madeleine case files re-opened after five years, rather than through the efforts of Scotland Yard. She and her team are working separately from the Yard, although there is close liaison between the two.

Yesterday Portuguese Justice Minister Paula Teixeira da Cruz said the decision to reopen the case, taken last week, was due to the work of the Policia Judiciaria and not because of pressure from Scotland Yard. She said: "The PJ developed diligences that allowed for this process to be reopened. Often there are almost perfect crimes and not all of them are discovered all over the world. If the PJ requested the reopening, it has good motives to do so."

Portuguese law officials and senior officers in the PJ have been acutely aware of criticism of the initial police investigation and insist they are determined to solve the case.

The McCann's Portugese lawyer Rogerio Alves wants the parents to act as 'assistants' in the case [AFP]

Ms Teixeira da Cruz urged people to be "proud" of the work being done by the PJ, which she insisted had not been idle in seeking to solve the mystery.

For a time Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, were seen as arguidos or suspects but that status was lifted. Now they are being kept fully informed of all developments and were given a personal briefing of the work of the PJ in Lisbon last week.

The McCann's Portuguese lawyer, Rogerio Alves, is reportedly seeking for his clients to be "assistants" in the case. This would allow their lawyer to work closely with state prosecutors.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 09:11:51 PM
Oh dear the Telegraph and the Sunday Times.

Lets hope the journalistic might of the highly esteemed Daily Star can help them out of this crises.

N

theres  is no crisis....... when you have lost a daughter in these circumstances there are no crises...but I would not expect you to understand
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 09:25:51 PM
Thats the way the press works. One paper is often the first to run with a story that could cause waves, especially when it concerns people who are know to be particularly litigious. Then other papers, who were more cautious are free to report that other papers have reported it. Papers are not there to report what other papers say, they only use that as "cover" when they are concerned about being sued.  The second paper also has corroborative information that warrants publication.

That's very true and is quite significant....the telegraph has been very guarded about what it has printed which indicates it suspects possible litigation...so its not just me who thinks carter ruck will be expecting another bumper pay day
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 09:28:29 PM
The Telegraph won't have a copy of the suppressed report - they're just reporting what another paper is reporting. Newspapers do this all the time when they don't have their own source.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 09:36:55 PM
if you read the telegraph article it is exactly as I expected.. the telegraph makes no claims...it simply says ....evidence supressed by parents claims sunday times...which is true... Im sure the mcCanns cannot ignore this now.I hope more papers pick up on it

davel....two different papers can't break the same story! I honestly thought you'd be man enough to deal with this!!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 09:38:37 PM
davel....two different papers can't break the same story! I honestly thought you'd be man enough to deal with this!!

First it was significant that no other paper was reporting it, now another one has and it's even more significant! Fancy that!!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 09:40:37 PM
I don't think the McCanns would react to The Times story or any story about them at this point.

They right now got what they wanted, there is an active police investigation looking for Madeleine. Nothing else matters.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 09:42:00 PM
davel....two different papers can't break the same story! I honestly thought you'd be man enough to deal with this!!

they haven't broken the same story..the telegraph have dropped the times in it by "quoting" them...that's all they have done. the more papers that quote the times then the more chance of legal action. In fact the guarded way the telegraph have reported the story indicates that they expect action against the times..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on October 27, 2013, 09:42:21 PM
The content of the news article(s) is not really the point. The real story here is that two papers have now printed stories that paint the McCanns in a less than glowing light.

This is on top of the Murdoch controlled Fox news in the US who interviewed some 'expert' who was also critical.

This is worrying news for the McCanns - we all know how quickly the media can turn against people and they do have a massive influence on public opinion.

N
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 09:45:24 PM
The content of the news article(s) is not really the point. The real story here is that two papers have now printed stories that paint the McCanns in a less than glowing light.

This is on top of the Murdoch controlled Fox news in the US who interviewed some 'expert' who was also critical.

This is worrying news for the McCanns - we all know how quickly the media can turn against people and they do have a massive influence on public opinion.

N

I still think it doesn't matter to them right now.. They are in a completely different movie now.. the police is finally looking for their daughter.. much bigger thing for them than some internet forum and sunday papers
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 09:45:34 PM
I don't think the McCanns would react to The Times story or any story about them at this point.

They right now got what they wanted, there is an active police investigation looking for Madeleine. Nothing else matters.

I don't think the Mccanns will react either. Because it's true. If an active police investigation was that important they would have asked for it to be kept open in 2008.

This is MASSIVE news. It makes a mockery of their 'no stone unturned' campaign.

 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 09:46:46 PM
The Telegraph won't have a copy of the suppressed report - they're just reporting what another paper is reporting. Newspapers do this all the time when they don't have their own source.
Are your sure that e-fit suits you ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 27, 2013, 09:48:48 PM
I don't think the Mccanns will react either. Because it's true. If an active police investigation was that important they would have asked for it to be kept open in 2008.

This is MASSIVE news. It makes a mockery of their 'no stone unturned' campaign.

No Stone Unturned*




* [except ones we don't want people looking under]
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 09:49:21 PM
I don't think the Mccanns will react either. Because it's true. If an active police investigation was that important they would have asked for it to be kept open in 2008.

This is MASSIVE news. It makes a mockery of their 'no stone unturned' campaign.

This is what you think with the limited information you have.

Jesus kept saying, "Father, forgive them, because they don't know what they're doing."  8(0(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 09:53:34 PM
It makes a mockery of their 'no stone unturned' campaign.
It must be reckoned that clever Mrs Janet Kennedy, in December 2007, stated that instead of turning all stones, le motto had become "we'll never loose hope, never".
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 09:54:24 PM
I don't think the Mccanns will react either. Because it's true. If an active police investigation was that important they would have asked for it to be kept open in 2008.

This is MASSIVE news. It makes a mockery of their 'no stone unturned' campaign.

this woiuld be massive news if it were true..we don't know yet
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 10:02:46 PM
This is what you think with the limited information you have.

Jesus kept saying, "Father, forgive them, because they don't know what they're doing."  8(0(*

and Dave Lister said "I'm not a God, I've just been misquoted".

It must be reckoned that clever Mrs Janet Kennedy, in December 2007, stated that instead of turning all stones, le motto had become "we'll never loose hope, never".

The really should have taken that advice!

this woiuld be massive news if it were true..we don't know yet

You said "lets wait and see if other papers print it". We waited. We saw.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:06:09 PM
The content of the news article(s) is not really the point. The real story here is that two papers have now printed stories that paint the McCanns in a less than glowing light.

This is on top of the Murdoch controlled Fox news in the US who interviewed some 'expert' who was also critical.

This is worrying news for the McCanns - we all know how quickly the media can turn against people and they do have a massive influence on public opinion.

N

I doubt very much that Murdoch is aware of that article..it is blatantly libellous in the libel capital of the world, the two reporters who wrote the article have already cost the times 500K in a libel case..what were they thinking...I don't think the McCanns will be at all worried when papers are telling the world they are no longer suspects and the PJ are looking for an abductor
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Victoria on October 27, 2013, 10:06:57 PM
I don't think the McCanns would react to The Times story or any story about them at this point.

They right now got what they wanted, there is an active police investigation looking for Madeleine. Nothing else matters.

Absolutely. There is simply no need for them to react. Two police forces are investigating abduction which is all that they require.

Incidentally though I would say - on the subject of the efits, people do realise they are classed as intellectual property, right? In other words the efits can be owned. And the right to publish or distribute them belongs to the owners who are not necessarily the people who commissioned them.  Think about it.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 27, 2013, 10:10:39 PM
Absolutely. There is simply no need for them to react. Two police forces are investigating abduction which is all that they require.

Incidentally though I would say - on the subject of the efits, people do realise they are classed as intellectual property, right? In other words the efits can be owned. And the right to publish or distribute them belongs to the owners who are not necessarily the people who commissioned them.  Think about it.

That doesn't really explain the letter from lawyers demanding confidentiality does it?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Victoria on October 27, 2013, 10:13:48 PM
That doesn't really explain the letter from lawyers demanding confidentiality does it?

Yes it does, when you consider what that letter related to. The implication some,of you are seeing in the article is that the McCanns attempted to enforce confidentiality in relation to the efit. In fact, confidentiality was enforced in regard to the whole report - how do you know this wasn't a clause relied upon to stop the investigators using personal information available to them to sell stories to journalists or write their own books? Nothing to do with the efits. The problem is  the two issues got conflated in the fall out.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 10:14:27 PM

Incidentally though I would say - on the subject of the efits, people do realise they are classed as intellectual property, right? In other words the efits can be owned. And the right to publish or distribute them belongs to the owners who are not necessarily the people who commissioned them.  Think about it.
Intellectual property ? Are you dreaming ? Would you hang these "pieces of art" in your garage ?
The people who draw faces on the pavements do better work.
The detectives contracted by the Fund were paid and had to execute orders. Nothing more, nothing less.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Victoria on October 27, 2013, 10:17:17 PM
Intellectual property ? Are you dreaming ? Would you hang these "pieces of art" in your garage ?
The people who draw faces on the pavements do better work.
The detectives contracted by the Fund were paid and had to execute orders. Nothing more, nothing less.

It doesn't have to be good to be classed as intellectual property, Anne. The fact is, those drawings belong to the people who created them not to the people who commissioned their creation. The McCanns had no right to distribute the efits. They would have done if a positive relationship had been maintained between them and their PIs but unfortunately that relationship deteriorated.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:18:37 PM
Intellectual property ? Are you dreaming ? Would you hang these "pieces of art" in your garage ?
The people who draw faces on the pavements do better work.
The detectives contracted by the Fund were paid and had to execute orders. Nothing more, nothing less.

Anne I don't think you quite grasp the principle of intellectual property..it is a bit intellectual
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:21:32 PM
That doesn't really explain the letter from lawyers demanding confidentiality does it?

if the McCanns employed a cleaner now they would be asked to sign a confidentiality agreement..there is nothing sinister
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 10:28:27 PM
It doesn't have to be good to be classed as intellectual property, Anne. The fact is, those drawings belong to the people who created them not to the people who commissioned their creation. The McCanns had no right to distribute the efits. They would have done if a positive relationship had been maintained between them and their PIs but unfortunately that relationship deteriorated.
Have you a link to the contract specifying the e-fits belong to the e-fitters ? And can you explain why the Fund would pay for a e-fit it without being allowed to use it ? Finally did SY pay some kind of royalties to the authors ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:29:11 PM
Actually, that would be for a court to decide. We can't become judge and just now can we  ?{)(**

not necessarily, it might not go to court..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:34:24 PM
Actually, that would be for a court to decide. We can't become judge and just now can we  ?{)(**

you should remember that in UK courts the times would have to prove that everything in their article was true...would you like to reconsider your post
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:37:44 PM
In that case then it isn't libelous. Simple.

yes it is.. in the same way that the express didn't go to court,...they issued an apology
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 27, 2013, 10:39:47 PM
Anne I don't think you quite grasp the principle of intellectual property..it is a bit intellectual
When I freely publish a chronicle it remains my intellectual property. If somebody plagiarises it I can sue the cheater.
A person contracted to make an e-fit isn't free, the contract may or not specify how many copies will be made and the sketcher will be paid according to that.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:41:11 PM
of course I wouldn't. I made a factual statement. It's for a court to decide if something is libelous.

so what you are saying is that libel cannot be admitted to avoid a court case..you need to think again
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:50:28 PM
Its not for you to decide. Unless of course you are on the jury  8-)(--) or you are in a position to accept responsibility for the article and can apologise. Are you either?


like a lot of posters who debate with me you avoid the question when your argument falls apart...Libel can be admitted by a party to avoid going to court..its a fact

just to add..when you have completely lost the argument you post stupid smileys
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 10:54:36 PM
No  word of denial from the McCann camp yet then ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 10:58:57 PM
No  word of denial from the McCann camp yet then ?

not sure if you have noticed but its sunday afternoon
another little question for you
How long did it take to issue proceedings against amaral.... and against bennett
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 11:03:17 PM
Its not for you to decide. Unless of course you are on the jury or you are in a position to accept responsibility for the article and can apologise. Are you either?

so you have given up on your previous argument...have the good nature to admit that you were totally wrong before we continue the conversation
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 11:11:39 PM
not sure if you have noticed but its sunday afternoon
another little question for you
How long did it take to issue proceedings against amaral.... and against bennett

Nonsense

This is a very serious charge  ...   the man who's E fit the McCanns are accused of 'burying'   could be the man who took Madeleine afterall 

They have been accused in a broad sheet newspaper of  hiding information from the police   ...  information which was crucial to the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance

If an  immediate response and rebuttal was ever called for,  this is it
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 11:15:52 PM
Nonsense

This is a very serious charge  ...   the man who's E fit the McCanns are accused of 'burying'   could be the man who took Madeleine afterall 

They have been accused in a broad sheet newspaper of  hiding information from the police   ...  information which was crucial to the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance

If an  immediate response and rebuttal was ever called for,  this is it


well you can stamp your feet as much as you want but no one is going to take any notice of you
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on October 27, 2013, 11:17:46 PM
I've noticed the way you argue on here and it's not going to work with me.

The thread is here for all to see and you are arguing the toss because you refuse to accept that you do not have the authority to make the claims that it was libelous. It's also plain to see that I accept that out of court settlements are allowed. But you can not make that out of court settlement. Therefore the claim is not libelous.

Oh and by the way, you made a mistake. It's for the plaintiff to prove that the defendant made false statements, not the defendant proving they were true statements.

Here, we would be talking about English law, where the burden is on the defendant to prove that statements alleged to be libel are true.

In Portugal (and most of the rest of the world) the burden is the other way.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 11:21:08 PM
I've noticed the way you argue on here and it's not going to work with me.

The thread is here for all to see and you are arguing the toss because you refuse to accept that you do not have the authority to make the claims that it was libelous. It's also plain to see that I accept that out of court settlements are allowed. But you can not make that out of court settlement. Therefore the claim is not libelous.

Oh and by the way, you made a mistake. It's for the plaintiff to prove that the defendant made false statements, not the defendant proving they were true statements.

I can see now why you don't have a clue..research uk libel law and you just might have a clue whats going on


Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 27, 2013, 11:21:30 PM
Nonsense

This is a very serious charge  ...   the man who's E fit the McCanns are accused of 'burying'   could be the man who took Madeleine afterall 

They have been accused in a broad sheet newspaper of  hiding information from the police   ...  information which was crucial to the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance

If an  immediate response and rebuttal was ever called for,  this is it

I wonder which police that would be? Because at that time there was no active police investigation.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 11:22:38 PM
Nonsense

This is a very serious charge  ...   the man who's E fit the McCanns are accused of 'burying'   could be the man who took Madeleine afterall 

They have been accused in a broad sheet newspaper of  hiding information from the police   ...  information which was crucial to the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance

If an  immediate response and rebuttal was ever called for,  this is it

exactly..


Five years have been wasted in the hunt for Madeleine McCann while pictures of the prime suspect in her abduction were suppressed.

This has huge implications for the libel trial which is being heard  in Portugal the mccs have applied to give evidence .....

to say that G.A................harmed the search ....fgs
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 11:25:19 PM
I wonder which police that would be? Because at that time there was no active police investigation.

yes august 08 pj files released
nov 08 e fits produced and sent to pj
that's why they aren't in the files
so what did the pj do with them
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 27, 2013, 11:26:32 PM
Is that a new article in the times by Dominic Kennedy  (  I noticed it on googling news ) 

It begins  :

Five years have been wasted in the hunt for Madeleine McCann  while pictures of the prime suspect in her abduction were suppressed

Does anyone have a Times subscription  ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 27, 2013, 11:28:00 PM
Ok fair point. I've been reading to much on the Amaral case recently.  8(0(*

open minded my ars*..IM from the uk ..where are you from?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: xtina on October 27, 2013, 11:46:17 PM
Is that a new article in the times by Dominic Kennedy  (  I noticed it on googling news ) 

It begins  :

Five years have been wasted in the hunt for Madeleine McCann  while pictures of the prime suspect in her abduction were suppressed

Does anyone have a Times subscription  ?

all i can see  is this .....but we will see more later


by Madeleine’s parents Met Police/PA









Dominic Kennedy

Published 1 minute ago





Five years have been wasted in the hunt for Madeleine McCann while pictures of the prime suspect in her abduction were suppressed.
 
The e-fits were produced by a private detective agency hired by Madeleine’s parents, Kate and Gerry. The investigators based their pictures on a description provided by an Irish holidaymaker in Praia da Luz, Portugal, where Madeleine vanished shortly before her fourth birthday in 2007.
 

well better  get  battened  down for the on coming storm..........[i mean the weather]
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 28, 2013, 12:00:01 AM
all i can see  is this .....but we will see more later


by Madeleine’s parents Met Police/PA









Dominic Kennedy

Published 1 minute ago





Five years have been wasted in the hunt for Madeleine McCann while pictures of the prime suspect in her abduction were suppressed.
 
The e-fits were produced by a private detective agency hired by Madeleine’s parents, Kate and Gerry. The investigators based their pictures on a description provided by an Irish holidaymaker in Praia da Luz, Portugal, where Madeleine vanished shortly before her fourth birthday in 2007.
 

well better  get  battened  down for the on coming storm..........[i mean the weather]

Dominic Kennedy is The Times Investigations Editor   ...  I guess they must know they're on safe ground,  legally,  to run with this story 

Storm clouds gathering
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 28, 2013, 01:57:25 AM
To misquote Fawlty Towers: "Don't mention the Smith sighting!"

We all know why it worries them - but to have laboured bundleman for 5 years when their own guys told them to drop it. Incredible. 5 years wasted. More than ever the "search" seems insincere.

So you mean police, private detectives and the public wasted five years scouring the earth for a dark-haired, faceless man wearing light-coloured trousers and a brown jacket..

..when they could have been looking for -  a dark-haired man wearing light-coloured trousers and a brown jacket, facial features unavailable / unknown?

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 28, 2013, 02:03:48 AM
Important note

My post « Reply #5 on: Today at 12:11:19 AM » was a direct copy and paste from the Times article which was available to subscription members only.

John edited my post « Last Edit: Today at 02:02:07 AM by John »

I am now unable to verify that the Times article is accurate as I have no idea what edits John made and i am not going to do a word by word check with the original.

No content was changed or altered in any way, however some text was made bold to highlight its importance.  End off!

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 28, 2013, 02:13:24 AM
Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund.

I find this quite surreal.  Scotland Yard don't need permission from the "Fund" or anyone else when investigating the disappearance of a child.  They can seize any documents they want.

Was it more a case of the Report being hidden from SY?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 28, 2013, 02:29:09 AM
Seems to me that while the McCanns considered the efits 'tainted' by the financial dispute between them and Halligen SY have no such qualms with regard to their usefulness.

Further if these are considered by SY to be a key element in cracking the case won't the populous be appalled that several million more pounds of public money has been spent on this case than needed to be, and if Madeleine is alive several more years spent by her in goodness knows what situation, than if the efits had been handed over to SY in the beginning ?

Can you image the public outcry if it is eventually discovered that Madeleine died in the last 5 years and might well have been rescued if the e-fits had been handed over to the PJ when they were created.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 28, 2013, 02:39:18 AM
I find this quite surreal.  Scotland Yard don't need permission from the "Fund" or anyone else when investigating the disappearance of a child.  They can seize any documents they want.

Was it more a case of the Report being hidden from SY?

How about this for a scenario John ...

Henri Exton contacts Scotland Yard and says,  "I've got some important information that will be very relevant to your investigation,  but I can't give it to you  because the McCann lawyers have hamstrung me with legal threats"

So Scotland Yard approach the McCanns and say,  "We want this information  ...   get your lawyers to lift their threat so this witness can speak to us freely"

What can the McCanns do  ? ...  tell Scotland Yard that they will not call their legal dogs off,  and, therefore the information the police need will remain  'off limits'  ? 

Of course they couldn't 

They  HAD  to give written assurances that if  Exton gave the information that  Scotland  Yard wanted from him,   there would be be no legal objection from them


Rock and a hard place 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 28, 2013, 03:25:45 AM
It was clear to all who read the original and the 'edited' version of what changes were made !
The poster made a half assed attempt to discredit your integrity and even handedness, thankfully most intelligent members saw through the ruse as another poor attempt to derail and disrupt an important thread !

How very well  said 

 8@??)(
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 28, 2013, 03:39:34 AM
It looks like the other broadsheets are jointing in.  From the Irish Independent.

Maddie evidence was from 'hidden' report.

Ben Farmer – 28 October 2013

Critical new evidence at the centre of the reinvigorated hunt for Madeleine McCann came from a suppressed report by ex-MI5 investigators.

The evidence, including e-fits of a man seen carrying a child the night the toddler disappeared, was included in an intelligence report produced by a firm of former spies for her parents in 2008.

But the report was sidelined for five years by Gerry and Kate McCann because it was critical of people involved and would have caused a distraction if made public, 'The Sunday Times' reported.

The team of hand-picked former MI5 agents was hired by the McCanns in the spring of 2008, 10 months after their daughter disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz.

HYPERCRITICAL

But the report they produced was "hypercritical" of the McCanns and their friends and the authors were threatened with legal action if it were ever published.

The report contents were kept secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the author for a copy.

The e-fits of the suspect formed the centrepiece of a Crimewatch appeal earlier this month that attracted 2,400 calls from the public. (© Daily Telegraph, London)

Irish Independent

www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/maddie-evidence-was-from-hidden-report-29705131.html
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 28, 2013, 03:54:46 AM
Thank you icabod, and on that note I shall bid you good night !

Sweet dreams

It's always good to see the forum supported   ...  we are  under attack now , but that's the price that  a broad-church arena of free and open debate,  like ours,  pays

We stand above the bitterly fought partisan wars  that have raged fir six years ...   like a beacon of common sense
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 28, 2013, 03:58:39 AM
From The Australian.

Madeleine McCann e-fit pictures overlooked for 5 years.

Dominic Kennedy
The Times
October 28, 2013 11:01AM

FIVE years have been wasted in the hunt for Madeleine McCann while pictures of the prime suspect in her abduction were suppressed.

The e-fits were produced by a private detective agency hired by Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry. The investigators based their pictures on a description provided by an Irish holidaymaker in Praia da Luz, Portugal, where Madeleine vanished shortly before her fourth birthday in 2007.

www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/madeleine-mccann-e-fit-pictures-overlooked-for-5-years/story-fnb64oi6-1226748119500#
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 28, 2013, 05:16:18 AM
Madeleine McCann e-fit pictures overlooked for 5 years

   Dominic Kennedy
   The Times
   October 28, 2013 11:01AM

   
   New McCann appeal involves e-fits
   Madeleine McCann

FIVE years have been wasted in the hunt for Madeleine McCann while pictures of the prime suspect in her abduction were suppressed.

The e-fits were produced by a private detective agency hired by Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry. The investigators based their pictures on a description provided by an Irish holidaymaker in Praia da Luz, Portugal, where Madeleine vanished shortly before her fourth birthday in 2007.

The Irishman's account was overlooked at the time because it clashed with an earlier sighting by Jane Tanner, one of the McCanns' dining companions. Scotland Yard has now established that Ms Tanner's description appeared to match an innocent holidaymaker who had been collecting his child from a creche.

The e-fits were produced as part of an unpublished report by the private detective agency Oakley International that has been seen by The Sunday Times. They were finally broadcast on a BBC Crimewatch program this month, attracting 1,000 telephone calls and e-mails, some naming the same man.

One of the Oakley investigators told The Sunday Times: "I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme. It most certainly wasn't a new timeline and it certainly isn't a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things. And those e-fits you saw on Crimewatch were ours."

The McCanns declined to renew Oakley International's $843,000 contract in 2008 after suggestions that it was too expensive. The firm's founder, Kevin Halligen, was alleged to have failed to pass money to an investigator on the McCanns' case, although he denies this. This summer Halligen was jailed for 41 months by a US judge for an unrelated multimillion-dollar fraud.

Nonetheless, Oakley's e-fits have now become the centrepiece of Scotland Yard's investigation. The Oakley report deduced that a sighting of Madeleine by Martin Smith from Drogheda, Co Louth, was credible. Mr Smith, returning to his apartment in Praia da Luz about 9.50pm, saw a British-looking man carrying a motionless, barefoot girl in pyjamas. Madeleine was noted to be missing by her mother at 10pm.

The Oakley investigation concluded that an over-emphasis had been given to Ms Tanner's account. She described seeing a man about 9.15pm. There was a potential difficulty with Mr Smith's version. He estimated that he was 60 to 80 per cent certain that the man he saw was Mr McCann. Mr McCann's movements for that time have been established: he was seen by witnesses to be in a tapas restaurant.

Mr Smith's suggestion that he might have seen Mr McCann carrying Madeleine shortly before her disappearance was seized on by Goncalo Amaral, the Portuguese detective leading the search. The McCanns are suing Mr Amaral for alleging in a book that they might have faked their daughter's abduction.

An Oakley source told The Sunday Times that the Find Madeleine fund's lawyers had required the report to remain confidential.

The Portuguese authorities formally cleared the McCanns and have just reopened their investigation.

The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month's publication.

Scotland Yard said yesterday: "Where we have been able to make massive steps forward is by drawing together all the material gathered to date and reviewing it as a whole."

The Sun newspaper claimed yesterday that the e-fits resembled the Scottish paedophiles Charles O'Neill and William Lauchlan. Both are serving life sentences for murdering a woman to prevent her from reporting them for child abuse. At the time of Madeleine's disappearance they were living in Spain and using false passports. Leicestershire police questioned them about Madeleine in jail in 2011.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: colombosstogey on October 28, 2013, 06:18:52 AM
How about this for a scenario John ...

Henri Exton contacts Scotland Yard and says,  "I've got some important information that will be very relevant to your investigation,  but I can't give it to you  because the McCann lawyers have hamstrung me with legal threats"

So Scotland Yard approach the McCanns and say,  "We want this information  ...   get your lawyers to lift their threat so this witness can speak to us freely"

What can the McCanns do  ? ...  tell Scotland Yard that they will not call their legal dogs off,  and, therefore the information the police need will remain  'off limits'  ? 

Of course they couldn't 

They  HAD  to give written assurances that if  Exton gave the information that  Scotland  Yard wanted from him,   there would be be no legal objection from them


Rock and a hard place

I agree with you. The thing is IF the Exton team did the Efits then how did Scotland Yard end up with this information in the first place.... >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 28, 2013, 07:24:04 AM
The story from the Times has now appeared in the Mail.

It will be interesting to see the comments there, 2 as I type this comment.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 28, 2013, 07:43:03 AM
Unless the McCanns can successfully refute this story the integrity and sincerity of their search is in tatters. 5 years wasted.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 28, 2013, 07:46:21 AM
it's interesting that the Mail reports that the suppressed report considers Madeline wandering off a possibility. I wonder if that is the reason the McCanns stopped its publication. Because if Madeline wandered off then the only people to blame would be Kate and Gerry. That would seem to fit in with the claims of the report being overly critical of them.

Indeed. Not good for the McCann publicity machine.

This could well have a significant impact on the trial this week in Portugal.

Remembering of course there is more than one defendant.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 28, 2013, 07:49:39 AM
im suprised our australian media published this!!!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 28, 2013, 07:50:39 AM
it's interesting that the Mail reports that the suppressed report considers Madeline wandering off a possibility. I wonder if that is the reason the McCanns stopped its publication. Because if Madeline wandered off then the only people to blame would be Kate and Gerry. That would seem to fit in with the claims of the report being overly critical of them.

Madeline wandering off a possibility

Kate was adamant she could not have wandered off,  she 'knew' that 'they' had taken her.
She knows more than we do, she was there.

(http://www.mccannfiles.com/id301.html

"I knew immediately she'd been taken."
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 28, 2013, 07:52:42 AM
Madeline wandering off a possibility

Kate was adamant she could not have wandered off,  she 'knew' that 'they' had taken her.
She knows more than we do, she was there.

(link to follow)

Now that's magic.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 28, 2013, 08:50:13 AM
Quote
The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month's publication.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Eleanor on October 28, 2013, 08:54:34 AM
The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month's publication.

This has also been mentioned elsewhere.  And The PJ seem to have had them for longer than Scotland Yard.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 28, 2013, 09:02:31 AM
The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month's publication.

Since when did saying it make it true? Red provide a link to C4 news yesterday in which in was denied.

Also, the archiving of the case was in August 08 and the e-fits made in November 08.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 28, 2013, 09:03:16 AM
'The e-fits were in the possession of both Portuguese police and Scotland Yard for some years before this month's publication.'

For how long exactly ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 28, 2013, 09:03:26 AM
Since when did saying it make it true? Red provide a link to C4 news yesterday in which in was denied.

Also, the archiving of the case was in August 08 and the e-fits made in November 08.

it's your choice to believe it or not
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 28, 2013, 09:07:32 AM
Dominic Kennedy
Published at 12:01AM, October 28 2013

it is a follow up article that moderates a lot of the sensational Sunday Times article
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 28, 2013, 09:09:51 AM
Dominic Kennedy
Published at 12:01AM, October 28 2013

it is a follow up article that moderates a lot of the sensational Sunday Times article

Does  'moderates' mean in this context damage limitation ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 28, 2013, 09:11:37 AM
Does  'moderates' mean in this context damage limitation ?

probably - I wonder why The Times would do that?

The article has been on this forum for about 4 hours
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 28, 2013, 09:12:09 AM
If these e-fits were given to the PJ, who sent them? BTW, the police in Portugal usually don't rely on e-fits. If Oakley was threatened with legal action if the report was released, it certainly wasn't him who handed them over. So, I don't believe that these e-fits were ever handed over 5 years ago. This is damage control and spin by the McCanns.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 28, 2013, 09:15:27 AM
What does it matter? The original article was in the paper edition on Sunday and they can't change that one.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 28, 2013, 09:21:42 AM
it's your choice to believe it or not

I'd really like to know the truth actually. Belief is pointless in the face of opposing information.
 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Eleanor on October 28, 2013, 09:35:47 AM

I don't mind if The PJ with held them or not.  Or if The McCanns with held them.  There could have been very good reasons for either to do so.
What I mind is the rush to insist that it was The McCanns wot done it, yet again.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 28, 2013, 09:36:03 AM
If these e-fits were given to the PJ, who sent them? BTW, the police in Portugal usually don't rely on e-fits. If Oakley was threatened with legal action if the report was released, it certainly wasn't him who handed them over. So, I don't believe that these e-fits were ever handed over 5 years ago. This is damage control and spin by the McCanns.

Well isnt that just an excellent question?
 8((()*/

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 28, 2013, 09:40:49 AM
I don't mind if The PJ with held them or not.  Or if The McCanns with held them.  There could have been very good reasons for either to do so.
What I mind is the rush to insist that it was The McCanns wot done it, yet again.

im gunna stick with SY ..they are far more experienced that hand full of armchair bloggers  8-)(--)bashing the parents of missing madeleine..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 28, 2013, 09:41:51 AM
Well isnt that just an excellent question?
 8((()*/

Unfortunately according to the Daily Star, Clarence Mitchell is not available to comment. Fiest time for everything I suppose.

Still, It's a shame. He might've been able to clear all this up!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 28, 2013, 09:46:35 AM
In the tabloids now, take note Davel


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478087/Why-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-E-fits-kept-secret-5-years.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478087/Why-Maddie-suspect-E-fits-kept-secret-years-Images-evidence-sighting-uncovered-private-detectives-suppressed.html

Why were Maddie suspect E-fits kept secret for five years? Images and evidence of sighting uncovered by private detectives were suppressed

Images of man seen carrying child through Praia da Luz on the night of Madeleine's disappearance were unveiled on Crimewatch two weeks ago
Based on evidence from Irish holidaymaker Martin Smith and his family
Emerged yesterday that E-fits were contained in files from five years ago
Produced by private investigators hired by the McCanns


By Neil Sears

PUBLISHED: 01:15, 28 October 2013  | UPDATED: 01:15, 28 October 2013   

The E-fits of a ‘new’ suspect for Madeleine McCann’s disappearance were drawn up five years ago – and suppressed.

Images of a man seen carrying a child through Praia da Luz at 10pm on the night the then three-year-old vanished were unveiled on BBC1’s Crimewatch two weeks ago.

They are based on evidence from Irish holidaymaker Martin Smith and his family. At the same time, the British police team behind a new investigation revealed they had discounted a 9.15pm sighting of a man with a child by Jane Tanner, a friend holidaying with parents Gerry and Kate McCann and their three children.

It meant there was a new ‘timeline’ of Madeleine’s presumed abduction. Yet it emerged yesterday that the recently released E-fits were in fact contained in files produced five years ago by private investigators hired by the McCanns. Similarly, those private detectives had questioned the Tanner sighting and the timings associated with it.

But the E-fits were kept private, and the questioning of the Tanner sighting and related timeline were kept quiet. One detective said he was ‘utterly stunned’ to see his five-year-old dossier suddenly presented as new on TV.

The investigator told a Sunday newspaper: ‘I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme... it most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things... and those E-fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours.’

The McCanns are now fully behind the fresh police drive and release of the E-fits – but five years ago they were reluctant to issue them, possibly in part because witness Mr Smith’s account seemed inconsistent and unreliable.

Months after the disappearance and after seeing Gerry McCann on TV, Mr Smith told police that he thought the man he saw carrying a girl around Madeleine’s age at the very time she went missing reminded him of Gerry McCann himself.

Mr Smith has reportedly since withdrawn that claim – just as Portuguese police have officially told the McCanns they are no longer suspects for their daughter’s disappearance.

The couple have also won libel damages for false suggestions that they were in any way involved.

Numerous witnesses have also given statements making clear that Mr McCann was at his holiday complex at the moment the sighting occurred – which was at the very time when he and his wife started calling for help looking for Maddie.

But shortly after Mr Smith told police Mr McCann may have been the man he had seen carrying a little girl, a friend of the McCanns said: ‘Look at the facts. This man sees an individual carrying a child on the night Maddie vanished.

‘He waits 13 days to report this to the police, going back to Ireland  in the meantime. At this stage he admits he has no idea who the man is. Almost four months go by before, after seeing him on TV, he feels that it could be Gerry.

‘The truth is that this is part of  the victimisation of Gerry and Kate which has gone on from the very beginning by the Portuguese.’

Portuguese police have officially told Kate and Gerry McCann they are no longer suspects for the disappearance

In 2008, the McCanns used money from their charity fund to hire investigators from a firm called Oakley International, led by  former MI5 surveillance officer Henri Exton, to look into the mystery – and they focused on the Smith sighting.

They produced a dossier and called for the E-fits to be published. They also suggested Madeleine could have died after wandering off.

The McCanns, who became embroiled in an unconnected financial dispute with Oakley International at around the time they received the dossier, responded by warning the detectives of legal action if they publicised their report.

A source close to the fund said the report would have been ‘completely distracting’ if it had become public.


And

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/347672/Maddie-Crimewatch-pictures-kept-secret-for-five-years

Crucial evidence that could hold the key to finding Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years [KATE MCCANN/PA WIRE]
The file was suppressed after being handed to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators, it is claimed.

It included two e-fits of a man seen carrying a sleeping blonde girl to the beach in Praia da Luz, Portugal, at the same time the then-three-year-old’s mum Kate, 45, found her missing.

That man is now the focus of a worldwide police hunt.

Scotland Yard detectives released the e-fits a fortnight ago in a Crimewatch special about Madeleine’s May 2007 disappearance.

The show prompted 2,400 calls from the public after being broadcast across Europe.

But yesterday it was reported the pictures were available five years ago.

Madeleine has been missing since 2007
“Henri Exton”
A letter came from their lawyers binding us to confidentiality
Kate, husband Gerry, 45, and their advisers sidelined the private detectives’ file and instructed them not to divulge its contents.

The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, said the sighting by Irishman Martin Smith was “credible evidence”, had been “neglected for too long” and called on the e-fits to be immediately released.

Oakley International investigators were hired by the Find Madeleine fund set up to bankroll the McCanns’ search.

A source close to the McCanns said the report “would have been completely distracting” if made public.

They instead wanted to focus on a man seen by one of their friends and it would have been too expensive to conduct full investig-ations into both sightings, the source added.

Scotland Yard has since discovered that suspect was a dad carrying his own child.

The first e-fit released on Crimewatch
Former MI5 undercover operations chief Henri Exton, 62, who led the Oakley probe, said the fund took legal action to stop his team divulging its findings.

He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to confidentiality.”

It stopped him handing the report to Scotland Yard’s Operation Grange team until detectives had written permission from the fund, he added.

One Oakley investigator said he was “absolutely stunned” when he saw their theories and e-fits being unveiled on Crimewatch as a “new revelation”.

The second e-fit released by Crimewatch
A Metropolitan Police official said yesterday any withholding of the report was “not an issue” because they were not investigating the case at the time.

Portugal’s national police force last week reopened its own investigation.

A source close to the McCann fund said they had been wary of Oakley after allegations of financial irregularities.

A spokesman for Find Madeleine said “all information privately gathered” had been “fully acted upon where necessary” and passed on to Scotland Yard.

The McCanns’ spokesman Clarence Mitchell was unavailable for comment.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 28, 2013, 09:49:15 AM
Unfortunately according to the Daily Star, Clarence Mitchell is not available to comment. Fiest time for everything I suppose.

Still, It's a shame. He might've been able to clear all this up!

Oh, poor bloke must be tongue tied for a change
 @)(++(* @)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 28, 2013, 09:49:52 AM
im gunna stick with SY ..they are far more experienced that hand full of armchair bloggers  8-)(--)bashing the parents of missing madeleine..

So do think the Mccanns were correct in suppressing relevant information from the investigation, when they knew damn well the Tanner one was a waste of time ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 28, 2013, 09:57:43 AM
Unfortunately according to the Daily Star, Clarence Mitchell is not available to comment. Fiest time for everything I suppose.

Still, It's a shame. He might've been able to clear all this up!

poor  clarrie speechless for once??
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: carlymichelle on October 28, 2013, 09:58:23 AM
So do think the Mccanns were correct in suppressing relevant information from the investigation, when they knew damn well the Tanner one was a waste of time ?

most kind decent people think it is terrible!!!!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Eleanor on October 28, 2013, 10:01:10 AM
So do think the Mccanns were correct in suppressing relevant information from the investigation, when they knew damn well the Tanner one was a waste of time ?

The McCanns didn't know that the Tanner sighting was a waste of time.  Stop telling fibs.
And for all we know at the moment The PJ could well have had the same Efits, either from Mr. Smith himself or from The McCanns.

And as for suppressing information, who has been shouting the loudest about warning possible abductors?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 28, 2013, 10:04:31 AM
But both the PJ and the British police had those efits for some time, hardly hidden from them and their investigations, were they?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 28, 2013, 10:07:15 AM
most kind decent people think it is terrible!!!!

"most kind decent people" wouldn't bash and hound the parents of a missing child ..so that counts you out of that quote  8((()*/
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 28, 2013, 10:17:46 AM
"most kind decent people" wouldn't bash and hound the parents of a missing child ..so that counts you out of that quote  8((()*/

 8@??)(
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 28, 2013, 10:18:10 AM
We all seem to be focusing on the e-fits that were suppressed but there are other aspects of the report which are quite damning for the parents. The reports mentions Madeleine's irregular sleep patterns, the possibility of an accidental death after she left the house through the unlocked doors and also questions the discrepencies in the statements made by the parents and their friends.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 28, 2013, 10:34:37 AM
We all seem to be focusing on the e-fits that were suppressed but there are other aspects of the report which are quite damning for the parents. The reports mentions Madeleine's irregular sleep patterns, the possibility of an accidental death after she left the house through the unlocked doors and also questions the discrepencies in the statements made by the parents and their friends.

Agreed. I wonder if SY have the whole report? There was also mention of lie detector tests....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 28, 2013, 11:11:31 AM
Repeated here as a number of threads are discussing the same thing

Quote from: imustpointout on Today at 10:53:47 AM
"Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago.""

Telegraph 19/10/13 - before the Sunday Times article

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html

interesting that a fuss wasn't made of this at the time
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: C.Edwards on October 28, 2013, 11:43:38 AM
Repeated here as a number of threads are discussing the same thing

Quote from: imustpointout on Today at 10:53:47 AM
"Yet it also means that what could be the key e-fit lay under wraps for several years. "It was passed to the Portuguese police at the time and for whatever reason they decided to nothing whatsoever with it," said one source close to the McCann investigation. "It was then handed to the Met two years ago, and they have now deemed it worthy of publication, but frankly it should have been out there a long time ago.""

Telegraph 19/10/13 - before the Sunday Times article

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10391348/Madeleine-McCann-is-there-hope-at-last.html

interesting that a fuss wasn't made of this at the time

Who's the source? Someone who wants to deflect attention onto the PJ?  I find it hard to believe this as the PJ would have the e-fit in the released files. They don't.  They may have treated the e-fits as worthless (as I think many may also be inclined to think seeing as they were generated by a family who claimed they didn't get a good look at the person anyway!) but if they did that, you would expect record of it in the files.

Maybe this source is the same person who has originated this as-yet-unsubstantiated claim that Mr. Smith has retracted his "looked like Gerry" statement?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 28, 2013, 11:48:00 AM
Unnamed sources = always lessen credibility

At least here a reporter is putting his name to it when saying the efits were not passed to the PJ


PS CEdwards, efits apparently were done in sept 08 so wouldnt be in the files released in aug 08
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 28, 2013, 11:55:32 AM
Does  'moderates' mean in this context damage limitation ?

it means that they are concerned about being sued. You will notice that the Mail article talks about supressed but doesn't accuse the McCanns as the Times does. Why have the Mail done this..Carter Ruck...if what the Times has printed is true..they have nothing to fear..if it isn't..they could be in trouble
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 28, 2013, 12:04:58 PM
it means that they are concerned about being sued. You will notice that the Mail article talks about supressed but doesn't accuse the McCanns as the Times does. Why have the Mail done this..Carter Ruck...if what the Times has printed is true..they have nothing to fear..if it isn't..they could be in trouble

Morning davel! I missed you!

Have you seen all the articles? Is it true now? Did you note that Mr Mitchell wasn't available for comment?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aegean on October 28, 2013, 01:29:09 PM
If it's possible to make a comment that isn't part of the pro/anti tit-for-tat...

The main thing that sticks out for me about these efits is that there is a lot of confusion around them. The Smith sighting, and how various investigation teams have treated it, is also something that isn't so simple.

We know these efits were made around five years ago by the private investigation team the McCanns hired. But they have only just been released to the public.

Mr Smith delayed in relating what he saw and his suspicions, and the Smith sighting was initially not taken as seriously by all parties as it perhaps should have. The only people to think it was important, up till now, were Amaral and the "[ censored word]".

Now it appears that the McCanns deliberately suppressed the release of the efits. At some point, perhaps a couple of years ago when both the PJ and SY started their own separate (although I'm sure collaborating) inquiries, the police forces in both Portugal and the UK got hold of the efits.

Again, however, we only learned about them the other week. Perhaps the police wanted to make sure this was a credible sighting, that this man actually could be a "person of interest" and not just some innocent random bloke. Putting out efits of anyone who was seen at the time in the area without having properly investigated them first would only make things worse, create confusion, undermine the credibility of the inquiries. They may have wanted to try and do all they could to track this individual down and eliminate him before releasing an efit, like they did with Tannerman. Once they had exhausted all possibilities and got a credible timeline together, then they released the efits.

So, maybe the police had a legitimate reason in holding the efits back until releasing them to the public. The McCanns, however? Not only did they not release these efits, they even, it is claimed, legally threatened the investigative team so it would keep them hidden. The McCanns would not, however, be able to prevent the police from getting hold of the reports and the efits once they started their enquiries.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 28, 2013, 01:31:09 PM
Morning davel! I missed you!

Have you seen all the articles? Is it true now? Did you note that Mr Mitchell wasn't available for comment?

If you mean have the McCanns deliberately hidden the e fits ...then  I would say that at the moment there is not enough evidence to show that....according to the telegraph the e fits were given to the PJ and SY so someone isn't telling the truth...we don't know who yet..as regards Clarence's silence, perhaps Carter Ruck have told him to leave it to them...any statement could be prejudicial
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 28, 2013, 01:33:21 PM
If it's possible to make a comment that isn't part of the pro/anti tit-for-tat...

The main thing that sticks out for me about these efits is that there is a lot of confusion around them. The Smith sighting, and how various investigation teams have treated it, is also something that isn't so simple.

We know these efits were made around five years ago by the private investigation team the McCanns hired. But they have only just been released to the public.

Mr Smith delayed in relating what he saw and his suspicions, and the Smith sighting was initially not taken as seriously by all parties as it perhaps should have. The only people to think it was important, up till now, were Amaral and the "[ censored word]".

Now it appears that the McCanns deliberately suppressed the release of the efits. At some point, perhaps a couple of years ago when both the PJ and SY started their own separate (although I'm sure collaborating) inquiries, the police forces in both Portugal and the UK got hold of the efits.

Again, however, we only learned about them the other week. Perhaps the police wanted to make sure this was a credible sighting, that this man actually could be a "person of interest" and not just some innocent random bloke. Putting out efits of anyone who was seen at the time in the area without having properly investigated them first would only make things worse, create confusion, undermine the credibility of the inquiries. They may have wanted to try and do all they could to track this individual down and eliminate him before releasing an efit, like they did with Tannerman. Once they had exhausted all possibilities and got a credible timeline together, then they released the efits.

So, maybe the police had a legitimate reason in holding the efits back until releasing them to the public. The McCanns, however? Not only did they not release these efits, they even, it is claimed, legally threatened the investigative team so it would keep them hidden. The McCanns would not, however, be able to prevent the police from getting hold of the reports and the efits once they started their enquiries.


  Neither the latest article in the times or the mail article are saying that the MCanns suppressed the e fits
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 28, 2013, 01:39:06 PM
If you mean have the McCanns deliberately hidden the e fits ...then  I would say that at the moment there is not enough evidence to show that....according to the telegraph the e fits were given to the PJ and SY so someone isn't telling the truth...we don't know who yet..as regards Clarence's silence, perhaps Carter Ruck have told him to leave it to them...any statement could be prejudicial

I don't really understand how libel law works. Would it be prejudicial to say "we did not suppress these e-fits, they were handed over on such and such a date"...

That still wouldn't explain why they hadn't published them themselves though would it?


Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 28, 2013, 01:43:52 PM
I don't really understand how libel law works. Would it be prejudicial to say "we did not suppress these e-fits, they were handed over on such and such a date"...

That still wouldn't explain why they hadn't published them themselves though would it?


I think from CR's point they would prefer if nothing was said..weren't published because everyone though JT had identified the abductor
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 28, 2013, 01:45:57 PM
I don't really understand how libel law works. Would it be prejudicial to say "we did not suppress these e-fits, they were handed over on such and such a date"...

That still wouldn't explain why they hadn't published them themselves though would it?

Maybe they don't care right now what me and you and any Mike or Dave think about them at this very moment.
Because their daughter if finally being looked for by good police forces?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aegean on October 28, 2013, 01:48:01 PM

  Neither the latest article in the times or the mail article are saying that the MCanns suppressed the e fits

The McCanns had the efits from five years ago, yet we didn't hear anything from them about them. Even in her book, Kate McCann outlines all the sightings and efits but doesn't mention these ones. The media coverage is going to be uneven, much of it regurgitating other articles, a lot of it using vague or highly-qualified language for legal reasons, but still giving you enough to read between the lines. We can all choose to read between the lines in a way that fits our points of view.

Regardless, you can quibble (as I'm sure you will, over and over again) about who's responsible for not releasing the efits, but the fact is they've been around for five years, in the McCanns' possession, and have only now been released by the police. Surely there is a reason for this.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 28, 2013, 01:48:17 PM
If there was even the tiniest chance that the e-fits were going to help in finding Madeleine they should have been released 5 years ago.  The fact that they weren't released is very damaging.  I wonder if SY realised what they were doing and the huge can of worms they were opening by releasing them now?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aegean on October 28, 2013, 01:50:13 PM


I think from CR's point they would prefer if nothing was said..weren't published because everyone though JT had identified the abductor

No, not "everyone" thought that JT had identified the abductor. Many of us thought her sighting was a load of rubbish, maybe even a deliberate red herring. We were attacked, however, as being nasty and insensitive - by people rather like you!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 28, 2013, 01:50:45 PM
If there was even the tiniest chance that the e-fits were going to help in finding Madeleine they should have been released 5 years ago.  The fact that they weren't released is very damaging.  I wonder if SY realised what they were doing and the huge can of worms they were opening by releasing them now?

So who's decision was it not to release them
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aegean on October 28, 2013, 02:01:42 PM
So who's decision was it not to release them

Current evidence appears to point to the McCanns - Kate even avoided mentioning these efits in her book, in the section on efits.

And, considering they're the ones who commissioned the investigation that produced the efits and were therefore the ones you'd expect to release them, you really have to ask why

Yes, I know, you will say "but the PJ had them!" Maybe they did, but they didn't have them first. The McCanns and their PR team really have no trouble criticising the PJ for its alleged laxity, so it's surprising that they didn't move to release the efits themselves when they saw the PJ wasn't bothering.

Of course, they may have been concerned about releasing an efit of man with facial features not too disimilar from Gerry's, who the eye witness in fact felt was Gerry, carrying a small child in the direction of the beach, where some "[ censored word]" had suggested a dead Maddie may have been buried, at a time when the only people who could 100% corroborate that Gerry was actually somewhere else were his friends from the Tapas group. It was far easier for them to hope that "everyone" would believe Tannerman was the culprit, as that had no complications for them.

Now, I should point out that I don't necessarily believe that's what happened on the night Madeleine disappeared, but I do think this is an example of the McCanns interfering with the investigations and creating more of a problem for the efforts to find Madeleine.

But, I don't really know davel. Who do you think is responsible for not releasing them?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 28, 2013, 02:08:03 PM
Please note guys and gals.

The topic title has been changed to reflect the fact that several newspapers are now being quoted.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 28, 2013, 02:16:05 PM


I think from CR's point they would prefer if nothing was said..weren't published because everyone though JT had identified the abductor

Apparently the report cast doubt on the JT sighting.... The report they paid for.

According to the fund (you made a good point yesterday about it being an unnamed fund member, which I didn't acknowledge at the time, but I have taken on board) felt that the report was hyper critical and would have been a distracrtion. Fair enough, but they could have still released the pictures couldn't they?

The two didn't have to be released together.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 28, 2013, 02:27:25 PM
SY and the McCanns must have been well aware that they were opening this can of worms.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 28, 2013, 02:43:54 PM
SY and the McCanns must have been well aware that they were opening this can of worms.

It was Scotland Yard's decision, alone,  to  'open this can of worms'  ...  or do you  think they asked the McCanns permission before releasing the E fits to the public  ?

Kate and Gerry kept quiet about those E fits for years  (  and used their lawyers to make sure others kept quiet about them too )

It makes me  think Scotland Yard and the McCanns are not  quite as hand in glove as might appear 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Albertini on October 28, 2013, 02:52:13 PM
And so the trashing begins! As per usual with McCann supporters.

The odd thing is that the "source close to the fund" - who will of course be Clarence "Pinky" Mitchell - after all why have a paid spokesman and not use him, HAS NOT denied the story, he has simply given a defence as to the reason why this information was suppressed.

If it was not true why wouldn't the "source close to the fund" - Mitchell- have simply stated that the story was false if it was not true?

The fact that a defence has been forthcoming must automatically mean the article was correct.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 28, 2013, 02:53:39 PM
SY and the McCanns must have been well aware that they were opening this can of worms.

They had little else to show on Crimewatch. Very little else.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on October 28, 2013, 02:55:28 PM
The integrity, or otherwise, of the investigators is not the point here. I wouldn't expect anyone who worked for security services to be particularly honest or trustworthy - after all their chosen profession is one which relies heavily on secrecy and deceit.

The point is that these images existed - they could have been drawn by Walt Disney, it makes no difference. The images existed and they were suppressed.

Now, this suppression could be indicative of the McCanns interference in the case, the PJ's inadequacy as an investigate force, how desperate SY are to have something to show after 5 years or a mixture of all of the above.

Trying to taint the reputation of the people who created the images (which according to SY are extremely useful) doesn't solve anything and certainly doesn't absolve whoever is responsible for suppressing them.

N
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on October 28, 2013, 02:58:31 PM
Show me a PI that isn't dodgy, apart from Magnum of course (although his moustache was questionable)

N
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on October 28, 2013, 03:23:52 PM
Show me a PI that isn't dodgy, apart from Magnum of course (although his moustache was questionable)

N

You are intimately acquainted with PIs?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on October 28, 2013, 03:26:34 PM
You are intimately acquainted with PIs?

Well I've never been intimate with one if that is your question. My partner is a teacher.

N
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 28, 2013, 03:28:11 PM
Apparently the report cast doubt on the JT sighting.... The report they paid for.

According to the fund (you made a good point yesterday about it being an unnamed fund member, which I didn't acknowledge at the time, but I have taken on board) felt that the report was hyper critical and would have been a distracrtion. Fair enough, but they could have still released the pictures couldn't they?

The two didn't have to be released together.

According to the telegraph article they  passed the e fits on to the PJ and SY...So who's telling lies
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on October 28, 2013, 03:33:23 PM
According to the telegraph article they  passed the e fits on to the PJ and SY...So who's telling lies

Someone is - and I think some people are getting confused between the e fits and the report. I have no doubt that the critical report was suppressed (who could blame them) but we don't have enough information yet to be sure about the pictures.

Still it remains interesting that papers are prepared to print the story.

N
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 28, 2013, 03:45:11 PM
According to the telegraph article they  passed the e fits on to the PJ and SY...So who's telling lies

I don't believe that the McCanns passed these e-fits on to the PJ or SY. This sounds more like damage control and passing the buck. Furthermore, the other e-fits they had made were presented in press conferences and in the newspapers, why not these?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 28, 2013, 04:04:49 PM
I don't believe that the McCanns passed these e-fits on to the PJ or SY. This sounds more like damage control and passing the buck. Furthermore, the other e-fits they had made were presented in press conferences and in the newspapers, why not these?

Now that is precisely the point.

They had every opportunity to so and matter the prevarication from their supporters, the fact of this cannot be ignored.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Albertini on October 28, 2013, 04:38:24 PM
Now that is precisely the point.

They had every opportunity to so and matter the prevarication from their supporters, the fact of this cannot be ignored.

If they had been passed on years ago, they can't have been suppressed, can they and the ST article would then be completely and utterly wrong.

And it can't be because Mitchell's quote in the original article is:

Quote
A source close to the McCanns said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if made public.

Now if it had been passed on years ago to the PJ and SY the quote would have been:

Quote
A source close to the McCann's said the report was considered “important enough to pass on to the PJ and SY many years ago” and “as such this story is completely false”

If they had passed them on then there is no reason for the ludicrous denials issued in the article is there?

Me thinks this is the spin machine cranking up.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 28, 2013, 07:41:43 PM
The McCanns made great play of all the other efits and impressions - why not Smithman? Turns out 5 years later it's Grange's only lead.

5 years wasted.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 28, 2013, 09:10:31 PM
They had little else to show on Crimewatch. Very little else.
Singularly very little after more that 5 millions pounds, apart from the brilliant pyjama demonstration !
And old stuff hardly operational.
Why didn't they interview the Smith family ? They saw, in the Files, that Paulo Rebelo,  for some reason and after sending a rogatory letter to the UK instead of to Ireland, renounced to interview the Smith family again. Why did they do the same ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 28, 2013, 09:15:58 PM
Singularly very little after more that 5 millions pounds, apart from the brilliant pyjama demonstration !
And old stuff hardly operational.
Why didn't they interview the Smith family ? They saw, in the Files, that Paulo Rebelo,  for some reason and after sending a rogatory letter to the UK instead of to Ireland, renounced to interview the Smith family again. Why did they do the same ?

Good question, Anne. But it would have to be pre-recorded interviews. I don't think they'd have them in the studio live.... just in case 8)-)))
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 28, 2013, 09:21:05 PM
I don't believe that the McCanns passed these e-fits on to the PJ or SY. This sounds more like damage control and passing the buck. Furthermore, the other e-fits they had made were presented in press conferences and in the newspapers, why not these?
Passing them to the PJ would be an excellent riposte to the Sunday Times acusation. If they don't fear the PJ's denying, why don't they use that simple and definitive argument ? Could it be that they don't want to hostilize the PJ, now openly searching for an abductor ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 28, 2013, 09:24:38 PM
Good question, Anne. But it would have to be pre-recorded interviews. I don't think they'd have them in the studio live.... just in case 8)-)))
Having them in the studio live and "masked" would have been a great scoop ! Millions watching/hearing the very ones who met the most famous abductor on the planet !
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 28, 2013, 09:28:37 PM
The McCanns made great play of all the other efits and impressions - why not Smithman? Turns out 5 years later it's Grange's only lead.

5 years wasted.

It really is totally bizarre isnt it......the efits the mccanns kept hidden for five years.... and two yrs after the Sy start their review hail as the big lead...youjust couldnt  make this up
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 28, 2013, 09:47:20 PM
It really is totally bizarre isnt it......the efits the mccanns kept hidden for five years.... and two yrs after the Sy start their review hail as the big lead...youjust couldnt  make this up

the search is insincere - it's never been about finding Maddie - it's about trying to acquit themselves of anything and everything
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 28, 2013, 10:53:45 PM
Why don't we ask our contacts on the forum to ask the PJ directly if the latest SY e-fits were ever passed on?  Without giving themselves away they can message me with the answer.

Some members may not know this but we do have insider contact directly with the PJ.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 29, 2013, 01:50:46 AM
Perhaps Crimewatch has just revealed why she was in such distress?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 29, 2013, 02:04:22 AM

And I'm thinking of her situation. You only think of Madeleine's parent's situation.

This isn't a Miss Marple episode. A real child went missing, and poor JT was caught up in it.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 29, 2013, 03:08:46 AM
That is a very kind analysis of the situation VIXTE, and is I am sure true of quite a few simple minded people, but there are people who have whipped themselves, and others, up into a frenzy of hatred against The Mccann Family.

And they cannot wait but to put the boot in.  They take no notice of facts, but manipulate everything by twisting to create myths and lies  [see Carlos tonight.  How he has twisted facts and told lies] in order to bully the people they hate.

I've always seen Mr Anjos mind as a 'defender of my country at all costs' ..he is looking at things from his own corner, his state of mind is not wide.. therefore he cannot be realistic.

I would like to send Mr Anjos to live for about 15 years all around the world, including the UK to see how the other cultures in the world breathe. I am sure after this his state of mind would be completely different..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 29, 2013, 07:42:25 AM
That is a very kind analysis of the situation VIXTE, and is I am sure true of quite a few simple minded people, but there are people who have whipped themselves, and others, up into a frenzy of hatred against The Mccann Family.

And they cannot wait but to put the boot in.  They take no notice of facts, but manipulate everything by twisting to create myths and lies  [see Carlos tonight.  How he has twisted facts and told lies] in order to bully the people they hate.

The frenzy and illogic is viewable in your post.

Merely because an ever increasing number of people don't believe the McCann's story.

Then, one of the McCann's supporters classic insults to others, calling them 'simple minded'.

 Nasty and predictable.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 29, 2013, 07:51:13 AM
The title of the thread is"It is claimed..."
So that confirms that as yet..it is not  a fact
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 29, 2013, 07:57:47 AM
The title of the thread is"It is claimed..."
So that confirms that as yet..it is not  a fact

There seems no reason to doubt it - there's been no denial and comment would not prejudice any legal proceedings. In fact the comments from the Fund would seem to verify it. Let's face it it's true.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 29, 2013, 08:07:35 AM
There seems no reason to doubt it - there's been no denial and comment would not prejudice any legal proceedings. In fact the comments from the Fund would seem to verify it. Let's face it it's true.

Then why is the title of the thread not definite...if you can please answer the question
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 29, 2013, 08:13:23 AM
There seems no reason to doubt it - there's been no denial and comment would not prejudice any legal proceedings. In fact the comments from the Fund would seem to verify it. Let's face it it's true.

So do you also assume it's true that Martin Smith has stressed that the man he saw was not Gerry McCann - as reported in the same article?

Quote

Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.
Unquote
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 29, 2013, 08:25:48 AM
So do you also assume it's true that Martin Smith has stressed that the man he saw was not Gerry McCann - as reported in the same article?

Quote

Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.
Unquote


It has been stated that representatives of the McCann's visited the Smith family.


Now why would they do that ?


It amounts to interference with witnesses. >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 29, 2013, 08:29:58 AM

It has been stated that representatives of the McCann's visited the Smith family.


Now why would they do that ?


It amounts to interference with witnesses. >@@(*&)

When was the visit..was it after the case was shelved
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 29, 2013, 08:32:05 AM

It has been stated that representatives of the McCann's visited the Smith family.


Now why would they do that ?


It amounts to interference with witnesses. >@@(*&)

The usual deflection tactics Stephen? 

Do you believe that Mr Smith has stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry or not? 


 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 29, 2013, 08:49:08 AM
Then why is the title of the thread not definite...if you can please answer the question

I wrote a long post to you about this yesterday, which you ignore. You then spent 4 pages going on about how absolutely fine it is to leave babies alone.

If the pictures were not suppressed, why weren't they posted on the MM website or published in KM's book, or presented to a press conference as countless other images were?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 29, 2013, 09:05:18 AM
The usual deflection tactics Stephen? 

Do you believe that Mr Smith has stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry or not? 


 

Defection ?

No way.

The only people who should have been interviewing the Smith family are the relevant police authorities.

It was interference with a witness, in a case that was shelved.

As to the sighting, invariably the first sightings and observations are the most reliable.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 29, 2013, 09:15:27 AM
stephen says

"The only people who should have been interviewing the Smith family are the relevant police authorities."

Why did the PJ not complete the interviews that Amaral say were organised in 2007?

Reading the case files - do you believe that the Smiths sighting was thoroughly investigated at the time?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 29, 2013, 09:24:07 AM
stephen says:

"As to the sighting, invariably the first sightings and observations are the most reliable."

really - would you apply that to all the statements made in the files?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 29, 2013, 09:32:42 AM
According to today's Correio da Manhã the PJ are now searching for Maddie's body. The whole article is only available in the paper edition which I have not gotten yet. 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 29, 2013, 09:33:59 AM
stephen says

"The only people who should have been interviewing the Smith family are the relevant police authorities."

Why did the PJ not complete the interviews that Amaral say were organised in 2007?

Reading the case files - do you believe that the Smiths sighting was thoroughly investigated at the time?

Well that remains a matter of opinion.

We also have to view it in context of the Tanner sighting which contradicted the Smith one.

Which of course was erroneous.

Also, the PJ were not not looking solely at an abduction were they, at this point ?

Additionally, why would an abductor casually  walk across an area where they could be seen by other people ?

However, the bottom, line remains. Nobody representing the mccanns, should have been 'visiting' the Smiths, as it could have amounted to intimidation of witnesses. >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 29, 2013, 09:40:09 AM
I wrote a long post to you about this yesterday, which you ignore. You then spent 4 pages going on about how absolutely fine it is to leave babies alone.

If the pictures were not suppressed, why weren't they posted on the MM website or published in KM's book, or presented to a press conference as countless other images were?

Must have missed your posts having to answer so many answers..my post was not about the right and wrongs of leaving babies alone it was about the rights of posters to dicate to other parents as to how they should look after their children.

The question I ask is why is the title of the thread as it is...obviously it is as yet unable to confirm the accusation as true
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 29, 2013, 10:56:48 AM
I've always seen Mr Anjos mind as a 'defender of my country at all costs' ..he is looking at things from his own corner, his state of mind is not wide.. therefore he cannot be realistic.
Do you really hope to convince posters that you don't look at things from your own corner with a wide mind and are therefore realistic ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: VIXTE on October 29, 2013, 01:28:10 PM
Do you really hope to convince posters that you don't look at things from your own corner with a wide mind and are therefore realistic ?

I have no MISSION in here, I am not trying to convince anyone anything :)

Do you see this forum as a convincing MISSION?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 29, 2013, 02:36:51 PM
I have no MISSION in here, I am not trying to convince anyone anything :)

Do you see this forum as a convincing MISSION?
Certainly not. I just wondered why you proffered such claims about somebody you don't know.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 29, 2013, 02:39:16 PM
Certainly not. I just wondered why you proffered such claims about somebody you don't know.

You mean like you do with the McCann's?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 29, 2013, 04:08:23 PM
Do you really hope to convince posters that you don't look at things from your own corner with a wide mind and are therefore realistic ?

Why would you assume that that is what this poster is doing? They are posting opinions on a forum. What are you doing?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 29, 2013, 04:21:30 PM
Members are asked not to post old newspaper articles in respect of live events.  Thank you.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 29, 2013, 04:54:05 PM
You mean like you do with the McCann's?
What are you pretending, DCI ? When did I say that the McCanns look at things from their own corner, that their state of mind is not wide and therefore they cannot be realistic ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 29, 2013, 05:29:59 PM
It was Scotland Yard's decision, alone,  to  'open this can of worms'  ...  or do you  think they asked the McCanns permission before releasing the E fits to the public  ?

Kate and Gerry kept quiet about those E fits for years  (  and used their lawyers to make sure others kept quiet about them too )

It makes me  think Scotland Yard and the McCanns are not  quite as hand in glove as might appear

Yes agreed, but I don't think the McCanns and SY would be 'hand in glove' (nice expression) anyway. SY are public servants, not those of the McCanns.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 29, 2013, 05:56:21 PM
You'll have to ask whoever started the thread. I'm satisfied that the McCanns did suppress the Oakley report.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 29, 2013, 06:00:52 PM
You'll have to ask whoever started the thread. I'm satisfied that the McCanns did suppress the Oakley report.

that much is 100 per cent obvious....and it should go without saying the efits as well......for whatever reason!!!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 29, 2013, 06:32:23 PM
You'll have to ask whoever started the thread. I'm satisfied that the McCanns did suppress the Oakley report.

theres people believe all sorts of things
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 29, 2013, 06:35:18 PM
theres people believe all sorts of things

I believe the children are our future, teach them well & let them lead the way
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 29, 2013, 06:41:34 PM
I believe the children are our future, teach them well & let them lead the way

hi ho silver lining
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 29, 2013, 06:44:33 PM
hi ho silver lining

No, damn I sung it.  Will be repeating in my head.  Time for SlipKnot I think @)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 29, 2013, 07:41:15 PM
You'll have to ask whoever started the thread. I'm satisfied that the McCanns did suppress the Oakley report.

I am too and also that the PJ nor SY were never given the e-fits.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 29, 2013, 08:25:16 PM
I am too and also that the PJ nor SY were never given the e-fits.

The strategy here is to keep quiet and hope it goes away. However many won't forget.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 29, 2013, 08:27:00 PM
The strategy here is to keep quiet and hope it goes away. However many won't forget.

especially now its been in the papers and saved to millions of computers
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 29, 2013, 08:30:33 PM
The strategy here is to keep quiet and hope it goes away. However many won't forget.
I wish you were an apostate of this e-fit whose empty eyes give the creeps..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 29, 2013, 08:55:10 PM
I wish you were an apostate of this e-fit whose empty eyes give the creeps..

Face of Evil
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 29, 2013, 08:59:13 PM
Face of Evil

Why  are the two efits so 100 per cent DIFFERENT!

wierd

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 29, 2013, 09:14:45 PM
Why  are the two efits so 100 per cent DIFFERENT!

wierd
Jamming effect. Intended ? Not sure.
What I still can't understand is for what reason the McCanns concealed those innocuous e-fits that don't confirm at all the feeling Mr Smith indicated in his statement. I would find understandable that they concealed Mr Smith's suggestion, not the e-fits that were very far from confirming it.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 29, 2013, 09:32:37 PM
Jamming effect. Intended ? Not sure.
What I still can't understand is for what reason the McCanns concealed those innocuous e-fits that don't confirm at all the feeling Mr Smith indicated in his statement. I would find understandable that they concealed Mr Smith's suggestion, not the e-fits that were very far from confirming it.

Good question...and Im tired of asking why gail cooper man and vicky beckham lookalike were given big press conferences, each of which were a million miles a way from efits done of a man seen THAT NIGHT IN THE AREA WITH A BLONDE 4 yr old CHILD....and of which not a pip squeek was ever made by the mccanns......for five years...but now in 2013 scotland yard have fanfared them.......!

Wierd case by any standard......
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on October 29, 2013, 09:48:02 PM
Good question...and Im tired of asking why gail cooper man and vicky beckham lookalike were given big press conferences, each of which were a million miles a way from efits done of a man seen THAT NIGHT IN THE AREA WITH A BLONDE 4 yr old CHILD....and of which not a pip squeek was ever made by the mccanns......for five years...but now in 2013 scotland yard have fanfared them.......!

Wierd case by any standard......

Stephen carpenter saw dodgy man as well (dreadlocks)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 29, 2013, 09:53:46 PM
Stephen carpenter saw dodgy man as well (dreadlocks)

email mitchell to set up a press conference, he must have missed that......,,,

have you seen bob marley  lookalike.....we need to eliminate him pdq........
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 29, 2013, 10:27:55 PM
Good question...and Im tired of asking why gail cooper man and vicky beckham lookalike were given big press conferences, each of which were a million miles a way from efits done of a man seen THAT NIGHT IN THE AREA WITH A BLONDE 4 yr old CHILD....and of which not a pip squeek was ever made by the mccanns......for five years...but now in 2013 scotland yard have fanfared them.......!

This is the big question - one that needs answering. And not just that it was ignored - but BURIED by McLawyers.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 29, 2013, 11:06:01 PM
Apostate,
why are you using a suspected abductor/or person of interest as a badge,your making him look like a hero when infact he is wanted by the police in a missing girls case,why would you do that.



"he is wanted by the police in a missing girls case"

Pretty good reason to show the e-fit really isn't it.  Someone might recognise it.

Would you rather it was hidden for a few more years?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 30, 2013, 12:00:49 AM
How rude!

When will Admin ban you for ever?

When will you  accept that on  THIS  forum it is Admin who decides who is banned

Stop provoking ... it is quite ridiculous from one who has been banned themselves, more than once, for breaking forum rules  ....  and who brags about it on other forums as being a  'badge of honour'

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: faithlilly on October 30, 2013, 12:40:21 AM
What a disgraceful post.

To be perfectly honest I think Red is amazingly restrained in her posts to supporters considering the sheer nastiness she is the recipient of at times.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 30, 2013, 12:47:16 AM
To be perfectly honest I think Red is amazingly restrained in her posts to supporters considering the sheer nastiness she is the recipient of at times.

Admin aren't daft faithlilly  ...  they see the nasty   'ensemble'  bullying that Red is targeted with
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Sherlock Holmes on October 30, 2013, 02:11:15 AM
"he is wanted by the police in a missing girls case"

Pretty good reason to show the e-fit really isn't it.  Someone might recognise it.

Would you rather it was hidden for a few more years?


Unfortunately it's not very likely that anyone is going to 'recognise' either of those e-fits.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 30, 2013, 08:08:49 AM
Just having another look at this article and noticed this line....

It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard.

Well that's blatantly untrue as Redwood said the man may be completely innocent....so if this is untrue how accurate is the rest of the article
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 30, 2013, 08:53:40 AM
Don't be daft all suspects may be completely innocent. Or maybe they just showed the e-fits for the fun of it.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 30, 2013, 12:22:53 PM
Don't be daft all suspects may be completely innocent. Or maybe they just showed the e-fits for the fun of it.

 you need to listen more carefully...did you watch crimewatch...Redwood was very clear that this man is not a suspect and may be perfectly innocent. to describe someone as a prime suspect is wrong and potentially libellous..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 30, 2013, 12:38:31 PM
now I've heard everything. Libelous comments about an unnamed, unidentified efit. What ever next.

Another one who doesn't understand the law as you have already shown on another thread. There isn't the slightest piece of evidence against this person but he is being referred to as a prime suspect.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on October 30, 2013, 12:49:50 PM
Another one who doesn't understand the law as you have already shown on another thread. There isn't the slightest piece of evidence against this person but he is being referred to as a prime suspect.
The appeal included the release of new e-fits and police received calls which put forward names for their new prime suspect
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 30, 2013, 01:05:19 PM
The appeal included the release of new e-fits and police received calls which put forward names for their new prime suspect

Redwood has never referred to him as a prime suspect
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aegean on October 30, 2013, 01:07:03 PM
Another one who doesn't understand the law as you have already shown on another thread. There isn't the slightest piece of evidence against this person but he is being referred to as a prime suspect.

Davel, I'm really confused. If this person isn't a "person of interest" then why is such a big fuss being made about his efit? Why are Scotland Yard distributing these images of him?

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 30, 2013, 01:09:08 PM
Davel, I'm really confused. If this person isn't a "person of interest" then why is such a big fuss being made about his efit? Why are Scotland Yard distributing these images of him?

hes certainly a person of interest..thank god someone is paying attention...but he is certainly not  "the prime suspect"
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 30, 2013, 05:55:53 PM
now I've heard everything. Libelous comments about an unnamed, unidentified efit. What ever next.


Thank goodness noone said anything defamatory about this man (not Clarence the handsome one). Imagine the law suit!

(http://i.imgur.com/bjvzT9B.jpg)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 30, 2013, 06:04:27 PM

Thank goodness noone said anything defamatory about this man (not Clarence the handsome one). Imagine the law suit!

(http://i.imgur.com/bjvzT9B.jpg)

Knowing what we do now about suppressed e-fits, this photo is almost laughable. It would be laughable if it wasn't that a child has potentially been left in the hands of a paedophile for 5 long years because her parents didn't want to look bad!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 30, 2013, 06:07:49 PM
Another one who doesn't understand the law as you have already shown on another thread. There isn't the slightest piece of evidence against this person but he is being referred to as a prime suspect.

You can only libel a person. You cannot libel an e-fit.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 30, 2013, 06:14:17 PM
I find this pic more laughable look at him ... what a tramp ?>)()<

I wonder what it would reveal if Amaral's face in 2007 was placed beside his face now - just as an example of how features can change.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 30, 2013, 06:17:37 PM
I wonder what it would reveal if Amaral's face in 2007 was placed beside his face now - just as an example of how features can change.

yes I wonder ..amaral looks totally different now ..doesn't look the same as he did back then  >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 30, 2013, 06:19:18 PM

 ?>)()<

As does that.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 30, 2013, 06:19:29 PM
yes I wonder ..amaral looks totally different now ..doesn't look the same as he did back then  >@@(*&)

strange then to ridicule and mock 2 efits that have been released?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 30, 2013, 06:30:58 PM
Knowing what we do now about suppressed e-fits, this photo is almost laughable. It would be laughable if it wasn't that a child has potentially been left in the hands of a paedophile for 5 long years because her parents didn't want to look bad!

As we see Clarence was at one time remarkably keen to brandish pictures in front of the the cameras. What made him so shy when it came to the e-fits?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 30, 2013, 06:36:14 PM
As we see Clarence was at one time remarkably keen to brandish pictures in front of the the cameras. What made him so shy when it came to the e-fits?

And still no comment from he regarding the suppression. He's not really earning his £70 k at the moment is he?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 30, 2013, 06:38:31 PM
I believe DCI Redwood of the Yard trumped Clarence on this occasion on Crimewatch.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 30, 2013, 06:56:14 PM
I imagine he has a part time evening job to boost his income.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 30, 2013, 08:38:15 PM
the removal of posts makes it look like it wasn't relied to ,.cheap shot by admin ..you allow a pic taking the micky out of Mitchell and a avatar with a e-fit pic on ..(who by the way could be a innocent man) "double standards"

The picture of Clarence makes a point: as McCann spokesman he has always been happy to show efits/impressions of persons of interest. Why not the Smithman efits?

Also why complain about an efit being shown in an avatar. "Do you know this man?" It's Grange's strongest lead. The more people see it the better surely?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 30, 2013, 08:57:46 PM
And still no comment from he regarding the suppression. He's not really earning his £70 k at the moment is he?

Perhaps this thread should be re-titled,  'The McCanns and their spokesman have yet to deny that e-fits were suppressed'
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 30, 2013, 09:09:50 PM
Perhaps this thread should be re-titled,  'The McCanns and their spokesman have yet to deny that e-fits were suppressed'

I noticed that Clarence was available to comment on the Tractorman story today. That was "pure speculation". Still nothing on this though.

I would've thought that He/they would be desperate to deny the suppression of important evidence for 5 years!

The only thing I can assume is that it's all completely true and they're frightened taht the whole report will come out if they make a fuss about it.

If I had  a damning report and someone claimed I didn't, I'd just produce it. Best thing they can do is keep their mouths shut and hope it goes away.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 30, 2013, 09:20:38 PM
I noticed that Clarence was available to comment on the Tractorman story today. That was "pure speculation". Still nothing on this though.

I would've thought that He/they would be desperate to deny the suppression of important evidence for 5 years!

The only thing I can assume is that it's all completely true and they're frightened taht the whole report will come out if they make a fuss about it.

If I had  a damning report and someone claimed I didn't, I'd just produce it. Best thing they can do is keep their mouths shut and hope it goes away.

But they have,  in effect,  been accused of sabotaging the search for their missing child  ...  how can they not respond to that  ? 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 30, 2013, 09:43:21 PM
But they have,  in effect,  been accused of sabotaging the search for their missing child  ...  how can they not respond to that  ?
Responding would be dignify attacks. Carter Ruck is pondering, be patient.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 30, 2013, 09:55:20 PM
But they have,  in effect,  been accused of sabotaging the search for their missing child  ...  how can they not respond to that  ?

If it is true, what can they possibly say? They have little choice other than to say nothing.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 30, 2013, 10:10:05 PM
If it is true, what can they possibly say? They have little choice other than to say nothing.

Yes in their position silence is the best option - it hasn't hit the headlines so only those who take a keen interest in the case know about it. Most people don't look beyond the "Maddie held by gypsies" type stories.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 30, 2013, 10:45:04 PM
If I were Amaral I would have Halligen and his associates cited to give evidence.  Absolute dynamite!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 30, 2013, 10:46:11 PM
how would you like the mccanns/Mitchell to respond ? they be damned if they do and damned if they don't..just to satisfy a handful of posters on a forum get over it 8-)(--)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 30, 2013, 10:50:02 PM
how would you like the mccanns/Mitchell to respond ? they be damned if they do and damned if they don't..just to satisfy a handful of posters on a forum get over it 8-)(--)

Their silence is very telling Benita.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 30, 2013, 10:52:30 PM
Their silence is very telling Benita.

I don't agree ..why should they feed posters obsessions ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 30, 2013, 10:56:48 PM
how would you like the mccanns/Mitchell to respond ? they be damned if they do and damned if they don't..just to satisfy a handful of posters on a forum get over it 8-)(--)

And the Sunday Times, Telegraph and Mail.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 30, 2013, 10:58:43 PM
I don't agree ..why should they feed posters obsessions ?

They have got some very serious questions to answer now that it has been revealed that the e-fits which Kennedy commissioned on their behalf were held back.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 30, 2013, 11:00:37 PM
I don't agree ..why should they feed posters obsessions ?

Exactly.  We all know that whatever they said  - it would immediately be turned into yet more sticks to beat them with.    If they say anything it will be wrong, and if they don't say anything it will be wrong.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 30, 2013, 11:01:31 PM
They have got some very serious questions to answer now that it has been revealed that the e-fits which Kennedy commissioned on their behalf were held back.

We are still unsure of the provenance and potential accuracy of these e-fits.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on October 30, 2013, 11:03:45 PM
Exactly.  We all know that whatever they said  - it would immediately be turned into yet more sticks to beat them with.    If they say anything it will be wrong, and if they don't say anything it will be wrong.

my sentiments exactly  8((()*/
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Eleanor on October 31, 2013, 06:21:48 AM
We are still unsure of the provenance and potential accuracy of these e-fits.

Indeed we are.  Well said.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 07:35:02 AM
There is so much blaming on here of scapegoats on the 'other' side.

The accusation is that the McCanns suppressed this information and this makes them terribly guilty.

People who identify as [ censored word] are making hay with this and claiming that this makes the McCanns blameworthy.

What if it emerged (which I think it will) that lawyers for the McCanns have been communicating regularly with the AG in Portugal for 5 years since the shelving of the case. What will these crowing people say when it is revealed that the e-fits were sent to the AG five years ago and they rejected them as insufficient to reopen the case? Will the Portuguese AG then be blameworthy.

My view is that the provenance and accuracy of the e-fits is currently doubtful, and that they may be mere window dressing for what is really going on. They are so doubtful that it would have been correct for both the McCanns and the AG to reject them as stand alone information.

We always need to keep in mind that we have only a small percentage of the really important information available to us.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 07:41:28 AM
There is so much blaming on here of scapegoats on the 'other' side.

The accusation is that the McCanns suppressed this information and this makes them terribly guilty.

People who identify as [ censored word] are making hay with this and claiming that this makes the McCanns blameworthy.

What if it emerged (which I think it will) that lawyers for the McCanns have been communicating regularly with the AG in Portugal for 5 years since the shelving of the case. What will these crowing people say when it is revealed that the e-fits were sent to the AG five years ago and they rejected them as insufficient to reopen the case? Will the Portuguese AG then be blameworthy.

My view is that the provenance and accuracy of the e-fits is currently doubtful, and that they may be mere window dressing for what is really going on. They are so doubtful that it would have been correct for both the McCanns and the AG to reject them as stand alone information.

We always need to keep in mind that we have only a small percentage of the really important information available to us.

Well all that was need to be done by the mccanns is to to prove the e-fits were sent 5 years ago.

Make no mistake on this.

The article in the Times has not been recinded has it /

Likewise an e-fit proves nothing.

Seeing a man carrying a child in his arms proves nothing.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 31, 2013, 07:41:56 AM
Exactly.  We all know that whatever they said  - it would immediately be turned into yet more sticks to beat them with.    If they say anything it will be wrong, and if they don't say anything it will be wrong.

How about just saying the article is false? What harm would that do?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 07:42:04 AM
Some people believe that the McCanns lied. We do not know. Inconsistencies are not necessarily lies. See the definition of lying- telling an untruth with the INTENTION of misleading and with no other valid justification. There is no way that people can know what the intention of the speakers was at the time. It is a forum myth that the McCanns lied; it is a fact that there are inconsistences in their statements over time.

We do know that the Portuguese Justice System decided that Amaral committed perjury.

I do believe that a conviction by a justice system is possibly more trustworthy than gossip on the internet.


"Some people believe that the McCanns lied."
 

That's because they did.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id136.html

"Nevertheless, it can also be concluded from the files that this surveillance with the periodicity that was mentioned above was not the one that is alleged in the files"

"They didn't check on them like they afterwards declared they did,"


So there you go, they lied in their own statements.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 07:47:06 AM
People may have more than one intention at a time. The primary purpose may have been to discuss progress, and an opportunity to discuss with lawyers also arose. If he would not have gone solely to discuss with lawyers, then it would not be a lie.

You really have to accept that you are nowhere near neutral in this case and will make extreme anti-McCann judgements where possible.

You cannot know that it was a lie, and so should stop using (misusing) the word.

At least he is not a convicted perjurer!

No I am not neutral.

Neither are you.

If someone is questioned as to whether they are pursuing a libel case, and they answer no, and it then turns out they did, it is a lie.

Also, do you seriously believe the Mccanns have never told a lie in this case ???
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 07:48:15 AM

"Some people believe that the McCanns lied."
 

That's because they did.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id136.html

"Nevertheless, it can also be concluded from the files that this surveillance with the periodicity that was mentioned above was not the one that is alleged in the files"

"They didn't check on them like they afterwards declared they did,"


So there you go, they lied in their own statements.

There is a difference between lying (deceiving with intention) and being mistaken.

No 'lies' have been proven that I have seen.

Amaral's thesis is strewn with misleading and erroneous statements and conclusions. I do not believe he was lying, merely that he was mistaken in his understanding of what the various pieces of information meant in context at the time.

Do these inconsistencies of Amaral make him a liar in this instance?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Luz on October 31, 2013, 07:53:09 AM
Trying to excuse whatever the McCann did or didn't do by attacking, defaming, vilifying other persons is a very poor defense.

That's why most people cannot turn a blind eye on the many twisting strategies, used so far, by the McCann, their extended family, their PRs, their legal team and most of all the Media that sold their soul for fear of being carter-rucked.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 07:58:01 AM
Trying to excuse whatever the McCann did or didn't do by attacking, defaming, vilifying other persons is a very poor defense.

That's why most people cannot turn a blind eye on the many twisting strategies, used so far, by the McCann, their extended family, their PRs, their legal team and most of all the Media that sold their soul for fear of being carter-rucked.

What was the exact charge Amaral was found guilty of?

In a forum where one group feels freee to impute lying to the McCanns with impunity, surely there is a balance where their adversary is known to be a proven liar, that his misdemeanors should also be considered.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 08:04:57 AM
Everybody is capable of lying.

You have still not shown that the McCanns were lying rather than mistaken in their beliefs. Was Amaral lying in his statements which have subsequently been shown to be in error?

No you are being pedantic.

I have  and others have shown the mccanns have lied.

I have had this 'conversation' with another poster on here before.

Perchance are you the same poster under another guise ?

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 08:14:04 AM
Well all that was need to be done by the mccanns is to to prove the e-fits were sent 5 years ago.

Make no mistake on this.

The article in the Times has not been recinded has it /

Likewise an e-fit proves nothing.

Seeing a man carrying a child in his arms proves nothing.

Do you know whether the e-fits were sent to the AG in an attempt to reopen the case?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 08:16:06 AM
No you are being pedantic.

I have  and others have shown the mccanns have lied.

I have had this 'conversation' with another poster on here before.

Perchance are you the same poster under another guise ?

You have shown they were in error. You have not shown that they lied.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 08:35:35 AM
"proof of what massive liars they are."

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id107.html

Madeleine Father Portugal Return

Q: Do you plan to cooperate with the Portuguese authorities?

GM: Of course.

Q: Are you going... are you going to meet with, errr... Portuguese authorities...
 
GM: Uhhh, we haven't...

 GM:The purpose of this visit was to, errr... really look at what can still be done in the search, we want to be, you know, looking     positively, not backwards - looking forwards. 'Cause, you know, we want to find our daughter. It's pretty simple really.

As we know from Madeleine Gerry McCann went to Portugal specifically to plot the libel claim and gagging order with Duarte. In perhaps the most prolonged and widespread example of his gratuitous lying he gave interview after interview stating that he was there for other reasons.


 

I think what you are posting is pure unadulterated spam
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 31, 2013, 08:37:29 AM
I'm not going to change a thing I've said.

Do you remember your personal attack on me when you claimed I didn't have a degree in Chemistry  ?

You're famous for your 'deflection' tactics Stephen - but you've excelled yourself with that one!!   LOL
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 31, 2013, 09:18:05 AM
"proof of what massive liars they are."

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id107.html

Madeleine Father Portugal Return

Q: Do you plan to cooperate with the Portuguese authorities?

GM: Of course.

Q: Are you going... are you going to meet with, errr... Portuguese authorities...
 
GM: Uhhh, we haven't...

 GM:The purpose of this visit was to, errr... really look at what can still be done in the search, we want to be, you know, looking     positively, not backwards - looking forwards. 'Cause, you know, we want to find our daughter. It's pretty simple really.

As we know from Madeleine Gerry McCann went to Portugal specifically to plot the libel claim and gagging order with Duarte. In perhaps the most prolonged and widespread example of his gratuitous lying he gave interview after interview stating that he was there for other reasons.


 

So - for their own reasons  they didn't want to make certain information public at that particular moment.   So what?   It's their business - and it's up to them  to decide when it would be the best time  to make such  information public - if they wanted to.        After all - it's their family's lives that would be affected   - not yours  - nor mine, nor anyone else's. 

Their legal action against Amaral was their private business - and it was completely up to them how they handled it.    They are not public property.   This notion that they are somehow obliged to share all their private business with every Tom, Dick and Harry who wants to know it - is outrageous. imo

     




Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 09:21:25 AM
So - for their own reasons  they didn't want to make certain information public at that particular moment.   So what?   It's their business - and it's up to them  to decide when it would be the best time  to make such  information public - if they wanted to.        After all - it's their family's lives that would be affected   - not yours  - nor mine, nor anyone else's. 

Their legal action against Amaral was their private business - and it was completely up to them how they handled it.    They are not public property.   This notion that they are somehow obliged to share all their private business with every Tom, Dick and Harry who wants to know it - is outrageous. imo

   

 So what?

He lied,
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 09:24:47 AM
So - for their own reasons  they didn't want to make certain information public at that particular moment.   So what?   It's their business - and it's up to them  to decide when it would be the best time  to make such  information public - if they wanted to.        After all - it's their family's lives that would be affected   - not yours  - nor mine, nor anyone else's. 

Their legal action against Amaral was their private business - and it was completely up to them how they handled it.    They are not public property.   This notion that they are somehow obliged to share all their private business with every Tom, Dick and Harry who wants to know it - is outrageous. imo

   

.... inappropriate comment removed ....

The tax-payer is paying for their incompetence. or haven't you noticed ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Luz on October 31, 2013, 09:28:43 AM
So - for their own reasons  they didn't want to make certain information public at that particular moment.   So what?   It's their business - and it's up to them  to decide when it would be the best time  to make such  information public - if they wanted to.        After all - it's their family's lives that would be affected   - not yours  - nor mine, nor anyone else's. 

Their legal action against Amaral was their private business - and it was completely up to them how they handled it.    They are not public property.   This notion that they are somehow obliged to share all their private business with every Tom, Dick and Harry who wants to know it - is outrageous. imo

   


In that case why do my taxes have to pay for the PJ to look for their daughter and to pay for the Courts to indulge their imbecile Court Trials against those they don't like?!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 31, 2013, 09:49:28 AM
.... inappropriate comment removed ....

The tax-payer is paying for their incompetence. or haven't you noticed ?

The McCanns have paid their taxes and GM still is - and probably above the standard rate too. 

As a taxpayer myself, I do not begrudge a single penny of my money being spent on finding out what happened to a missing child.   In fact I think taxpayer's money should be allocated on a permanent basis - not as a one off -so that it becomes normal practice for any British child who is abducted to receive the best possible chance of being found - and that the money is there for that to happen.

If nothing else, the McCann case has highlighted the shortcomings which existed in the UK on the whole subject of missing people.  If the situation improves because of it then that is at least one good thing that will have come out of this tragedy.




 



 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 09:53:50 AM
The McCanns have paid their taxes and GM still is - and probably above the standard rate too. 

As a taxpayer myself, I do not begrudge a single penny of my money being spent on finding out what happened to a missing child.   In fact I think taxpayer's money should be allocated on a permanent basis - not as a one off -so that it becomes normal practice for any British child who is abducted to receive the best possible chance of being found - and that the money is there for that to happen.

If nothing else, the McCann case has highlighted the shortcomings which existed in the UK on the whole subject of missing people.  If the situation improves because of it then that is at least one good thing that will have come out of this tragedy.




 



 

so that it becomes normal practice for any British child who is abducted


Abducted?  How many has there been?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 09:54:09 AM
The McCanns have paid their taxes and GM still is - and probably above the standard rate too. 

As a taxpayer myself, I do not begrudge a single penny of my money being spent on finding out what happened to a missing child.   In fact I think taxpayer's money should be allocated on a permanent basis - not as a one off -so that it becomes normal practice for any British child who is abducted to receive the best possible chance of being found - and that the money is there for that to happen.

If nothing else, the McCann case has highlighted the shortcomings which existed in the UK on the whole subject of missing people.  If the situation improves because of it then that is at least one good thing that will have come out of this tragedy.




 

So should £5,000,000 , and of course this is increasing day by day, be spent on ALL MISSING PEOPLE ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 10:01:05 AM
My personal belief is that Madeleine was in all probability beyond all help when these e-fits were made, so I don't feel terribly outraged by there suppression, or no more so than I would at the realisation that a parent is hindering the search for their child.

There are people on this forum who claim that Madeleine could very well be alive and in the clutches of a paedophile ring and yet those very same people seem to be fine with the suppression of evidence which could potentially have saved her from 5 years of that living hell!

The evidence that they were suppressed is that they have not been seen until October 2013 whereas they were produced in November 2008.

How does one reconcile these actions as those of parents looking for a live child?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 10:06:50 AM
My personal belief is that Madeleine was in all probability beyond all help when these e-fits were made, so I don't feel terribly outraged by there suppression, or no more so than I would at the realisation that a parent is hindering the search for their child.

There are people on this forum who claim that Madeleine could very well be alive and in the clutches of a paedophile ring and yet those very same people seem to be fine with the suppression of evidence which could potentially have saved her from 5 years of that living hell!

The evidence that they were suppressed is that they have not been seen until October 2013 whereas they were produced in November 2008.

How does one reconcile these actions as those of parents looking for a live child?

By deflecting & blaming everything on Amaral & the PJ.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: lizzibif. on October 31, 2013, 10:07:01 AM
Prove the mcCann's suppressed evidence.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 10:07:48 AM
Prove the mcCann's suppressed evidence.


Prove they didn't.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 31, 2013, 10:09:24 AM
So should £5,000,000 , and of course this is increasing day by day, be spent on ALL MISSING PEOPLE ?

The whole subject of Missing people should be elevated to be given more importance by the Authorities than it has been in the past. IMO.     Sadly, to some degree the McCann case has highlighted that need.

Tell me Stephen did you begrudge the £3million of taxpayers money it cost searching for April Jones, and did you publically complain about it?    If you didn't then surely that makes you quite a hypocrite. 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 10:09:55 AM
Can you prove they didn't ?

I don't need to.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 10:12:15 AM
The whole subject of Missing people should be elevated to be given more importance by the Authorities than it has been in the past. IMO.     Sadly, to some degree the McCann case has highlighted that need.

Tell me Stephen did you begrudge the £3million of taxpayers money it cost searching for April Jones, and did you publically complain about it?    If you didn't then surely that makes you quite a hypocrite.


You really don't get it do you ?

I object to all the attention given to the Mccanns.

Meanwhile the April Jones case was involving murder.

Do you believe this is a murder case ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 10:15:33 AM
The whole subject of Missing people should be elevated to be given more importance by the Authorities than it has been in the past. IMO.     Sadly, to some degree the McCann case has highlighted that need.

Tell me Stephen did you begrudge the £3million of taxpayers money it cost searching for April Jones, and did you publically complain about it?    If you didn't then surely that makes you quite a hypocrite.

April of course was abducted by a paedophile.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 10:16:14 AM

You really don't get it do you ?

I object to all the attention given to the Mccanns.

Meanwhile the April Jones case was involving murder.

Do you believe this is a murder case ?

It may well turn out to be a murder case.

Do you now approve the money?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: lizzibif. on October 31, 2013, 10:16:28 AM
Prove they didn't.

So you cant oblige thought not.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 10:18:04 AM
Prove the mcCann's suppressed evidence.

The e-fits were made in 2008. They were released in 2013.

We have seen many other e-fits, including eggman released by the Mccanns in the mean time. The 'fund' claimed that the reason they weren't shown is because it would be too expensive to investigate both Innocentman and Smithman. An article in the Sunday Times states that a letter was sent to the authors of the report demanding confidentiality. There has been no statement refuting this from the Mccann camp.

Scotland Yard needed permission from the fund to get access to the report and e-fits.

I'll reiterate though, the strongest evidence of suppression is that the e-fits were not seen until 2013 whereas they'd been commissioned in 2008.

 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 10:20:16 AM
So you cant oblige thought not.

And you can?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 31, 2013, 10:20:44 AM

You really don't get it do you ?

I object to all the attention given to the Mccanns.


So why are you giving them so much?  That makes no sense.


Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 10:25:09 AM
It may well turn out to be a murder case.

Do you now approve the money?



How long is a piece of string ?
 
i.e. how long will money be spent on this case, as there to be no end-point in sign ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 10:27:08 AM


How long is a piece of string ?
 
i.e. how long will money be spent on this case, as there to be no end-point in sign ?

you didn't answer the question, but I will answer yours.

When the appropriate authorities decide - just as they did in the April Jones case.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 10:27:33 AM
So why are you giving them so much?  That makes no sense.

Why are you ?

I object on a simple basis.

ALL missing people should be treated equally and clearly they are not.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 10:30:00 AM
Why are you ?

I object on a simple basis.

ALL missing people should be treated equally and clearly they are not.

But THAT is not the Mccanns fault - it is the fault of the system/authorities.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 10:34:01 AM
But THAT is not the Mccanns fault - it is the fault of the system/authorities.

The mccanns almost from day 1, have gone out to get publicity, set up a fund, use their contacts, have political backing, etc,.

How many other people have had this luxury ?

Or like other mccann supporters, do you think this is a special case, regardless of cost ?

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 10:39:37 AM
The mccanns almost from day 1, have gone out to get publicity, set up a fund, use their contacts, have political backing, etc,.

How many other people have had this luxury ?

Or like other mccann supporters, do you think this is a special case, regardless of cost ?

I don't call it a luxury - it was a necessity, probably because the incident happened abroad.

I cannot comment as to what efforts others take for the "luxury"

I do not think it is a special case, but it is an unsolved case.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 10:42:17 AM
I don't call it a luxury - it was a necessity, probably because the incident happened abroad.

I cannot comment as to what efforts others take for the "luxury"

I do not think it is a special case, but it is an unsolved case.

According to a program on radio 5 in the recent past, there are in the region of 100,000 missing people in the UK.

Now should we as tax payers be prepared to shelve out 5 million pounds on each of these ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 31, 2013, 10:42:27 AM
Why are you ?

I object on a simple basis.

ALL missing people should be treated equally and clearly they are not.

So your answer to that is to withdraw all taxpayers money from the McCann case and stop the search   - rather than press for more money to be spent on on all missing children.   Poor Madeleine.



 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Angelo222 on October 31, 2013, 10:44:20 AM
So - for their own reasons  they didn't want to make certain information public at that particular moment.   So what?   It's their business - and it's up to them  to decide when it would be the best time  to make such  information public - if they wanted to.        After all - it's their family's lives that would be affected   - not yours  - nor mine, nor anyone else's. 

Their legal action against Amaral was their private business - and it was completely up to them how they handled it.    They are not public property.   This notion that they are somehow obliged to share all their private business with every Tom, Dick and Harry who wants to know it - is outrageous. imo

   

The moment they started appealing to the 'public' for help and set up a Limited Company to  receive donations was the moment they lost any right to call the search for Madeleine a private matter.

As far as tax payers money is concerned the McCanns should be paying for this investigation because 1. They asked for it and 2. They can well afford to contribute.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 10:44:41 AM
So your answer to that is to withdraw all taxpayers money from the McCann case and stop the search   - rather than press for more money to spent on on all missing children.   Poor Madeleine.

What about all the other people missing ?

Poor them.

You really have revealed all you care about is the mccanns, and that is awful.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 10:46:09 AM
So what?

He lied,

Avoiding telling the whole truth is not necessarily lying.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 10:47:04 AM
According to a program on radio 5 in the recent past, there are in the region of 100,000 missing people in the UK.

Now should we as tax payers be prepared to shelve out 5 million pounds on each of these ?

If that amount is needed yes.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Angelo222 on October 31, 2013, 10:51:25 AM
Avoiding telling the whole truth is not necessarily lying.

Der God!!!!   I've heard it all now.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 10:52:13 AM
If that amount is needed yes.

Have you calculated the amount involved ?

0.5 trillion pounds..................................
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 10:52:30 AM
Der God!!!!   I've heard it all now.
@)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 31, 2013, 10:53:04 AM
The moment they started appealing to the 'public' for help and set up a Limited Company to  receive donations was the moment they lost any right to call the search for Madeleine a private matter.

The same appeals for help were made to the public over April Jones.  Are you saying that shouldn't have happened.

A fund was also set up for April Jones for donations which the public wanted to make.   Are you saying that made April's parents public property?

The fact that there was a collossal response to Madeleine's disappearance by the public who wished to make donations was not the McCanns nor Madeleine's fault.

There came a point where they had to do something about the donations -  and with it being totally alien territory to them, and probably because they were in the middle of nightmare at the time - they went along with the advice given to them by the experts.    What is there to criticise in that?     
 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 10:53:28 AM
Der God!!!!   I've heard it all now.

and that Angelo, is the mind set of the ingrained Mccann suipporter.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 10:55:04 AM
Have you calculated the amount involved ?

0.5 trillion pounds..................................

then you have answered your own question haven't you.

Maybe you could quote the average spend on missing person cases in the UK?

But it is irrelevant - you have clearly stated that you object to the amount spent on the Mccann case ONLY.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 10:57:46 AM
then you have answered your own question haven't you.

Maybe you could quote the average spend on missing person cases in the UK?

But it is irrelevant - you have clearly stated that you object to the amount spent on the Mccann case ONLY.

No , it is you not dealing with the issue, as you clearly support the mccanns; left, right and centre.

The bottom line remains the same.

The tax-payer is forking out for 2 incompetent parents, and there is no getting away from that.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 11:01:11 AM
No , it is you not dealing with the issue, as you clearly support the mccanns; left, right and centre.

The bottom line remains the same.

The tax-payer is forking out for 2 incompetent parents, and there is no getting away from that.

you see now we are coming to the truth - YOU object to it because you consider they were incompetent parents.

All the other reasons you gave are just irrelevant.

I support the Mccanns in the search for a resolution to this case - is that clear enough for you?

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 11:07:08 AM
Der God!!!!   I've heard it all now.

Lying is stating something with the intention of misleading someone about that subject.

Not saying everything you know or avoiding or refusing to say something is not lying.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lying-definition/

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: pathfinder73 on October 31, 2013, 11:07:32 AM
Smithman isn't in the key sightings section of Kate's book. Nothing they say can satisfactorily explain this vital oversight. A man seen with a child at 10pm just after Madeleine was reported missing only 450 metres away from the apartment. Madeleine disappeared and it seems some wanted Smithman to also disappear! He was always the number 1 suspect IMO and definitely the number 1 suspect for many others now because of the McCann's own evasive actions.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 31, 2013, 11:07:48 AM
No , it is you not dealing with the issue, as you clearly support the mccanns; left, right and centre.

The bottom line remains the same.

The tax-payer is forking out for 2 incompetent parents, and there is no getting away from that.

Wrong.   The taxpayer is paying out to find Madeleine  - who SY think may still be alive.   The fact that you would dearly love them to stop searching for that little girl says it all IMO.

(awaits the usual mantra)



Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 11:11:07 AM
Wrong.   The taxpayer is paying out to find Madeleine  - who SY think may still be alive.   The fact that you would dearly love them to stop searching for that little girl says it all IMO.

(awaits the usual mantra)





Do you have access to Scotland Yards thoughts?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 11:13:52 AM
you see now we are coming to the truth - YOU object to it because you consider they were incompetent parents.

All the other reasons you gave are just irrelevant.

I support the Mccanns in the search for a resolution to this case - is that clear enough for you?

No, you clearly support the Mccanns no matter the circumstances and what they failed to do.

Also, why as a tax-payer should I continue to pay for someone else's incompetence /

Answer that.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 11:14:58 AM
Smithman isn't in the key sightings section of Kate's book. Nothing they say can satisfactorily explain this vital oversight. A man seen with a child at 10pm just after Madeleine was reported missing only 450 metres away from the apartment. Madeleine disappeared and it seems some wanted Smithman to also disappear! He was always the number 1 suspect IMO and definitely the number 1 suspect for many others now because of the McCann's own evasive actions.

How much attention is given to "Smithman" in the released files?

You know the official Police investigation - not a book!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 11:15:44 AM
Wrong.   The taxpayer is paying out to find Madeleine  - who SY think may still be alive.   The fact that you would dearly love them to stop searching for that little girl says it all IMO.

(awaits the usual mantra)

So why haven't they donated the money from the fund and the book sales to the SY investigation /

That is what the money was supposed to be for.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 11:18:33 AM
So why haven't they donated the money from the fund and the book sales to the SY investigation /

That is what the money was supposed to be for.

No it was not.

You really don't do truth do you?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 11:22:06 AM
No it was not.

You really don't do truth do you?

Yes the real truth, 13% on the 'search'.

The rest,  NOW YOU TELL ME.

LIKEWISE, WHY HAVEN'T THEY TRANSFERRED THE FUND, ETC, TO THE SY INVESTIGATION ?

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 31, 2013, 11:25:53 AM
It did happen.  And Leonor Cipriano wasn't the only one.  It was common practice when The PJ couldn't get a confession.

The only valid confession in Portuguese law is the one made in a court room in front of the judge. Any other confessions made at the earlier stages of an investigation are only valid if the defendent confirms it during the trial before the judge. Therefore, why beat a confession out of a suspect when all he/she has to do is retract or remain silent during the trial.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 11:26:40 AM
Yes the real truth, 13% on the 'search'.

The rest,  NOW YOU TELL ME.

Please justify your 13% claim- I think you will find it is doubtful that this is the case and depends on a biased analysis.

That aside, your reply is mere deflection.

Your statement was:

"So why haven't they donated the money from the fund and the book sales to the SY investigation /

That is what the money was supposed to be for"

Please justify this statement. Where does it say that the fund is meant to subsidise the SY investigation?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 11:27:47 AM
The only valid confession in Portuguese law is the one made in a court room in front of the judge. Any other confessions made at the earlier stages of an investigation are only valid if the defendent confirms it during the trial before the judge. Therefore, beating a confession out of a suspect is useless.

Are you sure that that is not a convenient myth.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 31, 2013, 11:30:07 AM
Are you sure that that is not a convenient myth.

It's the law. Santa paciência! BTW, Leonor's bother João confessed in court during the trial.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 11:31:35 AM
Please justify your 13% claim- I think you will find it is doubtful that this is the case and depends on a biased analysis.

That aside, your reply is mere deflection.

Your statement was:

"So why haven't they donated the money from the fund and the book sales to the SY investigation /

That is what the money was supposed to be for"

Please justify this statement. Where does it say that the fund is meant to subsidise the SY investigation?

The 13% comes from the accounts. Well documented.

Why the hell shouldn't the money be donated to the investigation ?

That was what it was supposed to be for in the first place ie. the 'search' so called, for Madeleine.

 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 31, 2013, 11:32:23 AM
It's the law. Santa paciência! BTW, Leonor's bother João confessed in court during the trial.
Santa, yes, and what an amazing lot of it !
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 11:33:37 AM
It's the law. Santa paciência! BTW, Leonor's bother João confessed in court during the trial.

Are you telling me that if someone confesses to a crime to the investigators, and then refuses to do so before the judge, then the confession is excluded from evidence.

Are there any penalties for making a confession and then withdrawing it.

Interested to be educated in the facts by references if you have them.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 11:36:29 AM
The 13% comes from the accounts. Well documented.

Why the hell shouldn't the money be donated to the investigation ?

That was what it was supposed to be for in the first place ie. the 'search' so called, for Madeleine.

 

A fund to find Madeleine.

Is that not what Scotland Yard are trying to do?

Or are they sardine munching & enjoying long boozy lunches with their Portuguese associates?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 31, 2013, 11:37:47 AM

Why the hell shouldn't the money be donated to the investigation ?

Why on earth should they spend money on serious investigation when they can spend it on crooked one ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 11:37:54 AM
The 13% comes from the accounts. Well documented.

Why the hell shouldn't the money be donated to the investigation ?

That was what it was supposed to be for in the first place ie. the 'search' so called, for Madeleine.

If that happened would you consider the investigation to be impartial and independent?

Are you aware if it is even legal for somebody to effectively pay for, or contribute to, a Police investigation in the UK?

ETA - I am aware that the Police  are paid for patrolling sports event setc.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 11:39:39 AM
The same appeals for help were made to the public over April Jones.  Are you saying that shouldn't have happened.

A fund was also set up for April Jones for donations which the public wanted to make.   Are you saying that made April's parents public property?

The fact that there was a collossal response to Madeleine's disappearance by the public who wished to make donations was not the McCanns nor Madeleine's fault.

There came a point where they had to do something about the donations -  and with it being totally alien territory to them, and probably because they were in the middle of nightmare at the time - they went along with the advice given to them by the experts.    What is there to criticise in that?     
 

They gave that money to a little girl in Africa to improve her life!

http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/local-news/funds-memory-april-jones-sponsor-6092936

It really, really annoys me when people try to compare the behaviour of the Mccanns with Coral and Paul Jones!

This thread is about suppression of information that could have helped a little girl be released from the clutches of a paedophile ring!

Why are you all deflecting?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 31, 2013, 11:40:17 AM
Are you telling me that if someone confesses to a crime to the investigators, and then refuses to do so before the judge, then the confession is excluded from evidence.

Are there any penalties for making a confession and then withdrawing it.

Interested to be educated in the facts by references if you have them.

Unfortunately, that is the law but I believe that the current Minister of Justice wants to change it. There was a case where a man confessed to a crime (I think murder) to the police but during his trial he remained silent, he didn't even retract his confession and the judge had to acquit him.
Therefore, confessions not confirmed in front the judge are excluded from the evidence and there are no penalties against the suspects if they retract. It is within their rights. These laws are a consequence of Portugal having lived 48 years under a dictatorship where the PIDE beat confessions out of political prisoners and which were the only evidence presented to the court afterwards.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 31, 2013, 11:40:37 AM

Interested to be educated in the facts by references if you have them.
http://www.dgpj.mj.pt/sections/DestBanner/novo-codigo-de-processo7411/downloadFile/attachedFile_1_f0/CPC_tabela_completa_29082013.pdf?nocache=1377857654.79 (http://www.dgpj.mj.pt/sections/DestBanner/novo-codigo-de-processo7411/downloadFile/attachedFile_1_f0/CPC_tabela_completa_29082013.pdf?nocache=1377857654.79)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 11:45:43 AM
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/population/domesticviolence/portugal.penal.95.pdf (http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/population/domesticviolence/portugal.penal.95.pdf)

In English please, at least a translation of the relevant clauses.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 31, 2013, 11:48:38 AM
In English please, at least a translation of the relevant clauses.
Sorry, I sent an erroneous link, I rectified in the post above.
http://translate.google.fr/
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 11:49:20 AM
If that happened would you consider the investigation to be impartial and independent?

Are you aware if it is even legal for somebody to effectively pay for, or contribute to, a Police investigation in the UK?

ETA - I am aware that the Police  are paid for patrolling sports event setc.

Well if they can't, they can donate the money to missing peoples' charities.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 11:51:01 AM
Well if they can't, they can donate the money to missing peoples' charities.

I believe they have said they will do something like that when the case is closed.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 11:57:43 AM
Sorry, I sent an erroneous link, I rectified in the post above.
http://translate.google.fr/

Still 555 pages of Portuguese.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:01:11 PM
Well if they can't, they can donate the money to missing peoples' charities.

see my earlier post and I will add that they have/are both raising money for charities, but every time they do they are ridiculed.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 12:04:11 PM
see my earlier post and I will add that they have/are both raising money for charities, but every time they do they are ridiculed.

Jimmy Savile raised money for good causes aswell didn't he.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 12:08:00 PM
I believe they have said they will do something like that when the case is closed.

So why do they need the money for now ?

They aren't paying PI's anymore.

Or is it for their ongoing legal expenses ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:09:01 PM
Jimmy Savile raised money for good causes aswell didn't he.

completely irrelevant to the discussion that I was having with stephen.

In fact completely irrelevant to anything on this forum.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 12:09:59 PM
Still 555 pages of Portuguese.

Do you expect Anne to translate them for you? Why don't you use Google translate?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 31, 2013, 12:10:26 PM
see my earlier post and I will add that they have/are both raising money for charities, but every time they do they are ridiculed.

Not by the press and TV - they love it.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:10:40 PM
Jimmy Savile raised money for good causes aswell didn't he.

i presume that you link ANYONE who raises money for charity into your nasty implication?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:11:49 PM
Not by the press and TV - they love it.

they are ridiculed by the type of person on forums like this who despise anything the Mccanns do.

Did I really have to explain that to you?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 12:15:24 PM
completely irrelevant to the discussion that I was having with stephen.

In fact completely irrelevant to anything on this forum.

You mentioned charity fund raising.

I mentioned another fund raiser,  who died an innocent man.

The McCanns are innocent & raise money for charity.

Savile was an alleged paedophile.

The McCanns claim their daughter was abducted by a paedophile.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 31, 2013, 12:17:09 PM
they are ridiculed by the type of person on forums like this who despise anything the Mccanns do.

Did I really have to explain that to you?

No you don't. But the press still sells about nine million papers every day - nine million papers of exclusively positive coverage every single day of the past five years.

Do they really care about a few online people?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:17:28 PM
Jimmy Savile raised money for good causes aswell didn't he.

I wonder why you would mention that person on this forum when you seem happy to use paedos as humour:

you posted:

"An environmentaly friendly paedophile ring effecient at traceless abduction"

It seems like a subject you like to post about.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 12:19:04 PM
You mentioned charity fund raising.

I mentioned another fund raiser,  who died an innocent man.

The McCanns are innocent & raise money for charity.

Savile was an alleged paedophile.

The McCanns claim their daughter was abducted by a paedophile.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Eleanor on October 31, 2013, 12:19:42 PM
The only valid confession in Portuguese law is the one made in a court room in front of the judge. Any other confessions made at the earlier stages of an investigation are only valid if the defendent confirms it during the trial before the judge. Therefore, why beat a confession out of a suspect when all he/she has to do is retract or remain silent during the trial.

So why did The PJ produce The Confessions at The Trial?  The Ciprianos did refute the confessions, and much good did it do either of them  as there wasn't any other evidence.  And not a scrap of forensics.  The PJ didn't even test the so called blood in the so called fridge.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:19:59 PM
You mentioned charity fund raising.

I mentioned another fund raiser,  who died an innocent man.

The McCanns are innocent & raise money for charity.

Savile was an alleged paedophile.

The McCanns claim their daughter was abducted by a paedophile.

nonsense - you should have explained it in your post - not now you have been questioned about it.

The implication of your initial post was very very clear.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 12:20:58 PM
nonsense - you should have explained it in your post - not know you have been questioned about it.

The implication of your initial post was very very clear.

What was that then?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:22:20 PM
What was that then?

stephen and I were discussing raising money for charity.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 31, 2013, 12:25:21 PM
So why did The PJ produce The Confessions at The Trial?  The Ciprianos did refute the confessions, and much good did it do either of them  as there wasn't any other evidence.  And not a scrap of forensics.  The PJ didn't even test the so called blood in the so called fridge.

oh dear,  I hope this thread doesn't turn into yet another hysterical  defense of the grotesque,   and  convicted,  child murderers of little Joana Cipriano
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 12:25:36 PM
So the alleged paedophile ring that the Mcccanns believe are holding their daughter hostage have had an extra 5 years with her due to the suppression of information by her parents that is now being trumpeted as vital to the investigation.

How does everyone feel about that then?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 12:27:53 PM
So why do they need the money for now ?

They aren't paying PI's anymore.

Or is it for their ongoing legal expenses ?

That is a question for the directors alone.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 31, 2013, 12:28:21 PM
So why did The PJ produce The Confessions at The Trial?  The Ciprianos did refute the confessions, and much good did it do either of them  as there wasn't any other evidence.  And not a scrap of forensics.  The PJ didn't even test the so called blood in the so called fridge.

You obviously know very little about the case. It is not the PJ who produces evidence at trials, it the Ministério Público. They can produce the confessions but if the defendent does not confirm them (BTW, João Cipriano confessed in court) they are not considered part of the evidence by the judge during the trial. Understand? For a case with no other evidence, I wonder why the brother and sister lost all of their appeals to the higher courts.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:28:26 PM
So the alleged paedophile ring that the Mcccanns believe are holding their daughter hostage have had an extra 5 years with her due to the suppression of information by her parents that is now being trumpeted as vital to the investigation.

How does everyone feel about that then?

I believe that it twice you have mentioned it this morning - why don't you open a paedophile ring topic?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 12:29:06 PM
So the alleged paedophile ring that the Mcccanns believe are holding their daughter hostage have had an extra 5 years with her due to the suppression of information by her parents that is now being trumpeted as vital to the investigation.

How does everyone feel about that then?

Inexcusable.

Now let's see how the mccann supporters respond.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 12:29:41 PM
That is a question for the directors alone.

Now who are they exactly ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 12:30:04 PM
Do you expect Anne to translate them for you? Why don't you use Google translate?

555 pages in a pdf.

Not really a reference, more a maze.

Maybe I will start to give cites in Finnish, as that is easy for me to read!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 31, 2013, 12:30:19 PM
So the alleged paedophile ring that the Mcccanns believe are holding their daughter hostage have had an extra 5 years with her due to the suppression of information by her parents that is now being trumpeted as vital to the investigation.

How does everyone feel about that then?

This is a crucial question cariad ...  and it is astonishing that the McCanns have yet to respond to it

It is not  just  hiding information that they are being accused of,  it is hiding information which might  have led to Madeleine being found
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 31, 2013, 12:30:44 PM
So the alleged paedophile ring that the Mcccanns believe are holding their daughter hostage have had an extra 5 years with her due to the suppression of information by her parents that is now being trumpeted as vital to the investigation.

How does everyone feel about that then?

It displays yet again a lack of urgency doesn't it, Cariad. A lack of urgency has been shown again and again throughout the history of this case. No proof in itself but definitely I would say indicative.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:33:38 PM
it is fascinating that Mccann opposers suddenly believe in and are willing to discuss an abductor when it includes a paedo?

How weird.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 12:37:10 PM
It displays yet again a lack of urgency doesn't it, Cariad. A lack of urgency has been shown again and again throughout the history of this case. No proof in itself but definitely I would say indicative.

So there is no urgency on the part of the Mccanns to have their missing child returned?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 31, 2013, 12:39:44 PM
So there is no urgency on the part of the Mccanns to have their missing child returned?

That's what the case history shows us IMO.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:41:12 PM
the re-interview of the Smiths that Amaral says was arranged - was cancelled by the PJ after he left.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 12:41:19 PM
So there is no urgency on the part of the Mccanns to have their missing child returned?

No, it doesn't look like it & I don't think it ever really has.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Eleanor on October 31, 2013, 12:41:50 PM
You obviously know very little about the case. It is not the PJ who produces evidence at trials, it the Ministério Público. They can produce the confessions but if the defendent does not confirm them (BTW, João Cipriano confessed in court) they are not considered part of the evidence by the judge during the trial. Understand? For a case with no other evidence, I wonder why the brother and sister lost all of their appeals to the higher courts.

Oh, so they did produce The Confessions in Court.  I thought you said that this wasn't allowed.  Fibbing, were you?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 12:42:01 PM
I believe that it twice you have mentioned it this morning - why don't you open a paedophile ring topic?

The topic is the suppression of information that might have lead to the safe return of Madeleine 5 years ago. It is the Mccans who have claimed that she is being held by Paedophiles, not me.

I was referring to their belief that she is alive and currently in grave danger and yet they have hindered her rescue.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 12:42:29 PM
No, it doesn't look like it & I don't think it ever really has.

That is ridiculous. The parents of a missing child don't want her back? Is there not a jot of compassion within you?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:43:40 PM
The topic is the suppression of information that might have lead to the safe return of Madeleine 5 years ago. It is the Mccans who have claimed that she is being held by Paedophiles, not me.

I was referring to their belief that she is alive and currently in grave danger and yet they have hindered her rescue.

being held by paedos is just one of the options.

Where is the proof that the efits were withheld?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 12:44:23 PM
There is none.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 12:45:03 PM
That is ridiculous. The parents of a missing child don't want her back? Is there not a jot of compassion within you?

So why didn't they release these E-fits in the same why they did the others?

being held by paedos is just one of the options.

Where is the proof that the efits were withheld?

The most obvious proof is that they weren't shown until 2013 despite being commissioned in 2008. I have supplied other evidence in previous posts.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 12:46:24 PM
That is ridiculous. The parents of a missing child don't want her back? Is there not a jot of compassion within you?

Well of course they cooperated so well with the original investigation into their daughters disappearance didn't they.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 31, 2013, 12:47:13 PM
That is ridiculous. The parents of a missing child don't want her back? Is there not a jot of compassion within you?

Why was it over two years before the petition for case review was launched, Jazzy?

There is no explanation for this given in the book.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 31, 2013, 12:47:24 PM
The topic is the suppression of information that might have lead to the safe return of Madeleine 5 years ago. It is the Mccans who have claimed that she is being held by Paedophiles, not me.

I was referring to their belief that she is alive and currently in grave danger and yet they have hindered her rescue.

Again,  cariad,  you manage to sum up  the significance of the  hidden e fits perfectly

If they had  not  been suppressed,  there is a possibility that they might  have led to Madeleine being found 5 years ago


Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 12:49:07 PM
odd - where is the proof that the efits were withheld, suppressed, hidden from the authorities etc?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 12:49:37 PM
odd - where is the proof that the efits were withheld, suppressed, hidden from the authorities etc?

And the proof they were not?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 12:50:29 PM
odd - where is the proof that the efits were withheld, suppressed, hidden from the authorities etc?

The proof is that they have not been shown, unlike numerous other e-fits, including a picture of a faceless guy.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 12:51:54 PM
And the proof they were not?

So we do not know whether they were offered to the AG as an attempt to reopen the case.

As we do not know, we do not know whether the McCanns witheld the information or Portugal rejected it.

As I sated in my original comment.

Maybe both sides should stop acting above their pay grade!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 12:52:41 PM
Again,  cariad,  you manage to sum up  the significance of the  hidden e fits perfectly

If they had  not  been suppressed,  there is a possibility that they might  have led to Madeleine being found 5 years ago

And IF they had been offered to the PJ, then the PJ would be to blame????
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 31, 2013, 01:11:02 PM
And IF they had been offered to the PJ, then the PJ would be to blame????

IF  the PJ were  'to blame'  for these e fits being hidden then Clarence Michell would have seen to it that British tabloids were screaming headlines to that affect  ...  he has not

In fact,  niether he,  nor the McCanns themselves,  have made any claim to have passed these e fits  to ANY police force  ...  not even to Scotland Yard  (  who appear to have got them directly from the McCanns' private investigators  ...  after  getting  McCann legal threats lifted  )
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 01:11:53 PM
IF  the PJ were  'to blame'  for these e fits being hidden then Clarence Michell would have seen to it that British tabloids were screaming headlines to that affect  ...  he has not

In fact,  niether he,  nor the McCanns themselves,  have made any claim to have passed these e fits  to ANY police force  ...  not even to Scotland Yard  (  who appear to have got them directly from the McCanns' private investigators  ...  after  getting  McCann legal threats lifted  )

Enough said.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 01:19:27 PM
IF  the PJ were  'to blame'  for these e fits being hidden then Clarence Michell would have seen to it that British tabloids were screaming headlines to that affect  ...  he has not

In fact,  niether he,  nor the McCanns themselves,  have made any claim to have passed these e fits  to ANY police force  ...  not even to Scotland Yard  (  who appear to have got them directly from the McCanns' private investigators  ...  after  getting  McCann legal threats lifted  )

So we do not know whether they were passed to the Portuguese. You are only assuming what happened.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 01:25:12 PM
So we do not know whether they were passed to the Portuguese. You are only assuming what happened.

It seems like a valid assumption based on the available facts to me.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 31, 2013, 01:27:49 PM
So we do not know whether they were passed to the Portuguese. You are only assuming what happened.

Well we know they  didn't pass them to Scotland Yard   ...  who had to go as far as getting McCann threats of legal action lifted before they could get the information from someone else  (  the McCanns private investigators )

Given that  the  McCanns didn't pass the e fits  to Scotland Yard,  why on earth would you think they would pass them to the PJ  ?   

The McCanns silence on the matter is deafening
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: lizzibif. on October 31, 2013, 01:29:37 PM
And the proof they were not?


You don't know either way..so I suggest you stop blabbing on about it..until you do.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 01:35:05 PM

You don't know either way..so I suggest you stop blabbing on about it..until you do.

Have you made that doctors appointment yet?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 01:36:26 PM
It seems like a valid assumption based on the available facts to me.

That would be as a totally unbiased observer with no axe to grind?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 01:41:29 PM
That would be as a totally unbiased observer with no axe to grind?

I have no axe to grind and I resent your assertion that I do!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: lizzibif. on October 31, 2013, 01:47:58 PM
Have you made that doctors appointment yet?

If you need! a doctors appointment ring then yourself..sorry but I don't have the number of your doctor so cant help you.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 01:50:16 PM
If you need! a doctors appointment ring then yourself..sorry but I don't have the number of your doctor so cant help you.

I'm fine I went this morning it's you I'm concerned about.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: lizzibif. on October 31, 2013, 01:59:11 PM
I'm fine I went this morning it's you I'm concerned about.

nice of you to be concerned my dear..but really im fine thank you.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 31, 2013, 02:14:35 PM
The topic is the suppression of information that might have lead to the safe return of Madeleine 5 years ago. It is the Mccans who have claimed that she is being held by Paedophiles, not me.

I was referring to their belief that she is alive and currently in grave danger and yet they have hindered her rescue.

I'm bumping this post in order to,  hopefully,  bring the thread back on topic
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 31, 2013, 03:14:14 PM
Oh, so they did produce The Confessions in Court.  I thought you said that this wasn't allowed.  Fibbing, were you?

I didn't say that it was not allowed. I said that any confessions made must be reconfirmed in the front of the judge during the trial in the court room. Is it that difficult for you to understand?

Any suspect has the right to retract any statements made during the investigation at the trial. However, once a confession is made in court in front of the judge, it can no longer be retracted.

BTW, Leonor did confess to the police in the presence of her lawyer but as she did not confess in the courtroom it was not valid as evidence.

Don't you ever ever dare call me a liar again!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 03:19:27 PM
So we do not know whether they were passed to the Portuguese. You are only assuming what happened.

There was a report on channel 4 news the other week, their europen affairs correspondent stated the efits were never passed on to the police.....c4 is a pretty reputable news channel
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 03:20:49 PM
I have no axe to grind and I resent your assertion that I do!

You're willing to give the Mccanns the benefit of the doubt then?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 31, 2013, 03:26:16 PM
The e-fits were never passed to the police, whether SY or PJ. The McCanns didn't give them out and Oakley didn't, so we can assume that they were suppressed for 5 years. It seems that Gerry, on Crimewatch, kept speaking about this new evidence several times, when he knew very well that they were part of the Oakley report from 5 years ago.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 03:28:13 PM
The e-fits were never passed to the police, whether SY or PJ. The McCanns didn't give them out and Oakley didn't, so we can assume that they were suppressed for 5 years. It seems that Gerry, on Crimewatch, kept speaking about this new evidence several times, when he knew very well that they were part of the Oakley report from 5 years ago.

Is that a fact?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Montclair on October 31, 2013, 03:32:38 PM
Is that a fact?

Yes, it is.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 03:33:38 PM
Montclair - is CdM a reliable newspaper?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 03:34:23 PM
Yes, it is.

Who says?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 03:46:02 PM
Yes, it is.

thanks for replying.

So the latest tractor man sighting is not full of holes like Swiss cheese?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 03:48:34 PM
Montclair - is CdM a reliable newspaper?

It was the Times that broke the story about the efits being buried for five years,   not CdM...followed by the tabloids and various tv stations...which a bit of embellishment and other tiny twists.....see my post above regarding c4 !


All this obfuscating is getting so tedious.....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 03:49:04 PM
Interesting news elsewhere, it seems SY and the PJ have asked to Mccanns not to comment in public.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 31, 2013, 03:56:05 PM
The McCanns have not denied that they kept this information  from the  police   ( including Scotland Yard ) 

It is a very serious accusation,  that implies they sabotaged the investigation into their daughter's disappearance

This is not the  time for a  'no comment'   
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 03:58:04 PM
The McCanns have not denied that they kept this information  from the  police   ( including Scotland Yard ) 

It is a very serious accusation,  that implies they sabotaged the investigation into their daughter's disappearance

This is not the  time for a  'no comment'

In the light of two active investigations and a request not to comment, the public appetite to hear their side of it, pick it to pieces and call it "lies" hasn't been catered to.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 04:00:31 PM
In the light of two active investigations and a request not to comment, the public appetite to hear their side of it, pick it to pieces and call it "lies" hasn't been catered to.

Didn't the PJ ask the McCanns not to talk to the media 6 years ago?
Didn't stop them then did it?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 04:02:41 PM
Didn't the PJ ask the McCanns not to talk to the media 6 years ago?
Didn't stop them then did it?

That is an area for discussion. I think you are wrong.

Perhaps this time the Mccanns have some faith in the PJ.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 04:05:55 PM
LOL serious allegations from forum posters - some of which have posted today that they can't understand simple statements.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 04:07:08 PM
That is an area for discussion. I think you are wrong.

Perhaps this time the Mccanns have some faith in the PJ.

Converted are they?  I hadn't realised the PJ were a religious organisation.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 04:07:51 PM
who mentioned converted?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 04:09:07 PM
Converted are they?  I hadn't realised the PJ were a religious organisation.


Very clever. Anything else?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 04:11:08 PM
53 pages (at least that is what it says on my computer)

Where is the proof that the efits were suppressed.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 04:17:15 PM
53 pages (at least that is what it says on my computer)

Where is the proof that the efits were suppressed.

Where is there any indication of any type whatsoever from any source or evidence over the years they were sent is the more pertinent question.....or indeed mentioned by the mccanns and or their PIs up until 2013 not a pip squeak at all anywhere...balance of probabilities is the time story is correct, you faff around it though till kingdom come......
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 04:19:01 PM
Where is there any indication of any type whatsoever from any source or evidence over the years they were sent is the more pertinent question.....or indeed mentioned by the mccanns and or their PIs up until 2013 not a pip squeak at all anywhere...balance of probabilities is the time story is correct, you faff around it though till kingdom come......

ah the old tried and tested turn it round and ask the question back answer.

Thankyou for your reply.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 31, 2013, 04:36:01 PM
let's take the 'nobody was searching' statement in the book.

The book was supposed to be a factual account of what happened.

Facts need to be checked.

It was widely reported in the aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance that local people and holidaymakers searched overnight and on subsequent days, both on news reports and in the media in general.

As far as I know the lie that only the Mccanns were searching has not been removed from the book, which was clearly a ploy to gain sympathy for the parents.

As to Amaral, he got the D.N.A. evidence wrong, no doubt about it, as it was inconclusive.

As to lying, have you ever met a person who has never lied in their lives ?

One of your better posts Stephen.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 04:39:16 PM
ah the old tried and tested turn it round and ask the question back answer.

Thankyou for your reply.

Nope just simple deductive logic.....look forward to your reply.......
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 31, 2013, 04:40:05 PM
Careful John - Clarence has achieved believed status today.

Ah...is that where he refused to speculate on the speculation?  8-)(--)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 04:52:00 PM
How many photos or drawings did the PJ - the lead investigating Police ever hold up?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 04:56:10 PM
He no longer lies with as many teeth in his mouth.

Clarence is now verified by Red

being facetious or putting words into others mouths doesnt help much......i offered NO opinion
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 04:58:49 PM
being facetious or putting words into others mouths doesnt help much......i offered NO opinion

you used what he said as confirmation/evidence.

No need to reply.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 05:06:00 PM
'Missing' I see so not abducted then.

Missing through abduction. How does the one cancel the other out?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 05:10:28 PM
Of course if the Portuguese Police had not closed the investigation into a missing child after about a year, the hated Clarence would not have had to do this.

Laugh away

Of course if the McCanns & their friends had cooperated with the Portuguese Police the investigation would have remained open.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 31, 2013, 05:11:31 PM
Of course if the Portuguese Police had not closed the investigation into a missing child after about a year, the hated Clarence would not have had to do this.

Laugh away

Sounds almost like a good theory, if it were not for the fact he also did it before the investigation was shelved.

January 2008. 'Cooperman'.

(No sign of him in the book or on the website either).
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 05:12:34 PM
How to avoid conviction in Portugal

Fly home with the approval of the PJ

Case closed.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 05:13:39 PM
Sounds almost like a good theory, if it were not for the fact he also did it before the investigation was shelved.

January 2008. 'Cooperman'.

(No sign of him in the book or on the website either).

reads Reds post
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 05:15:29 PM
How to avoid conviction in Portugal

Fly home with the approval of the PJ

Case closed.

And when they request you to come back & take part in a reconstitution, don't bother.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 05:24:53 PM
And when they request you to come back & take part in a reconstitution, don't bother.

The McCanns were willing to return. See the communications in the files.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 05:25:17 PM
maybe  Apostate should explain why the photo was brought to this form?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 05:25:32 PM
Of course if the McCanns & their friends had cooperated with the Portuguese Police the investigation would have remained open.

Not necessarily.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 05:25:47 PM
The McCanns were willing to return. See the communications in the files.

And did they?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 05:26:51 PM
The McCanns have not denied that they kept this information  from the  police   ( including Scotland Yard ) 

It is a very serious accusation,  that implies they sabotaged the investigation into their daughter's disappearance

This is not the  time for a  'no comment'

They have neither denied nor confirmed that point.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 05:27:04 PM
Damn it chief - they don't want to come back.

Don't worry - close the file.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 31, 2013, 05:27:35 PM
Can we keep to topic please.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 05:27:59 PM
Didn't the PJ ask the McCanns not to talk to the media 6 years ago?
Didn't stop them then did it?

Six years ago they were targets for framing and I do not blame them for using every tool at their disposal. Now apparently they are going to be associates with Portuguese Justice!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 05:29:04 PM
Where is there any indication of any type whatsoever from any source or evidence over the years they were sent is the more pertinent question.....or indeed mentioned by the mccanns and or their PIs up until 2013 not a pip squeak at all anywhere...balance of probabilities is the time story is correct, you faff around it though till kingdom come......

Balance of probabilities in your biased opinion.

I think the matter is still undecided.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 05:29:10 PM
Can we keep to topic please.

It is claimed that Oakley's Report and e-fits were suppressed for 5 years?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 05:29:19 PM
Six years ago they were targets for framing and I do not blame them for using every tool at their disposal. Now apparently they are going to be associates with Portuguese Justice!

Six years ago they were targets for framing


Is there any proof of this?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 05:30:16 PM
It is claimed that Oakley's Report and e-fits were suppressed for 5 years?

54 pages - any proof yet?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 05:30:26 PM
It is claimed that Oakley's Report and e-fits were suppressed for 5 years?

Is that a matter of fact or merely Oakley's assumption. Is it known whether or not the efits were shared with the AG.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 05:33:15 PM
Balance of probabilities in your biased opinion.

I think the matter is still undecided.

Whats biased about seeing there is no evidence of any kind whatsoever they were given........not a mention, not a squeek in five years from the Mccanns OR anyone else in any way shape or form.....such important efits to sit on some back burner, purleeeese! Youre having a laugh
 @)(++(*

No official has been quoted as confirming or denying, thats all youve got though....ignore the sand storm


Is this person lying? Do listen

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2760.msg97488#new


EDITED!!! For the hard of hearing
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 05:34:32 PM
Whats biased about seeing there is no evidence of any kind whatsoever they were given........not a mention, not a squeek in five years from the Mccanns OR anyone else in any way shape or form.....such important efits to sit on some back burner, purleeeese! Youre having a laugh
 @)(++(*

No official has been quoted as confirming or denying, thats all youve got though....ignore the sand storm

Where is YOUR evidence that it was not communicated to the Portuguese in an attempt to reopen the case.

There is no confirmation either way.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 05:38:32 PM
So we do not know whether they were offered to the AG as an attempt to reopen the case.

As we do not know, we do not know whether the McCanns witheld the information or Portugal rejected it.

As I sated in my original comment.

Maybe both sides should stop acting above their pay grade!

can you explain the point in red.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 05:38:52 PM
Six years ago they were targets for framing and I do not blame them for using every tool at their disposal. Now apparently they are going to be associates with Portuguese Justice!

Six years ago they were targets for framing

Is there any proof of this?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 05:40:09 PM
the repetitive asking for proof is boring to the extreme now
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on October 31, 2013, 05:40:23 PM
The truth has a terrible habit of rising to the surface so be under no illusion, if the Oakley claim about the report and e-fits turns out to be true it will have a significant impact on the McCanns credibility.  Watch out for a resignation or two first though as that is always a good indicator of things to come.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 05:41:27 PM
The truth has a terrible habit of rising to the surface so be under no illusion, if the Oakley claim about the report and e-fits turns out to be true it will have a significant impact on the McCanns credibility.  Watch out for a resignation or two first though as that is always a good indicator of things to come.

If
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 05:42:11 PM
the repetitive asking for proof is boring to the extreme now

Yes & I find you most entertaining.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 05:42:55 PM
Six years ago they were targets for framing

Is there any proof of this?
do you mean any evidence of this?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 05:45:16 PM
do you mean any evidence of this?

No
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 05:50:18 PM
No

 The PJ are very experienced at covering their tracks. in the Cipriano torture case it was proved in court that the torture took place but it was impossible to prove who did it. So no..you wont find proof but of course that does not mean it didn't happen
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 31, 2013, 05:54:01 PM
The McCanns have not denied that they kept this information  from the  police   ( including Scotland Yard ) 

It is a very serious accusation,  that implies they sabotaged the investigation into their daughter's disappearance

This is not the  time for a  'no comment'
They could have immediately said "no comment", which precisely avoids the meaningful failure to answer, why didn't they ? The alternative only required a bit of imagination.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 05:55:15 PM
They could have immediately said "no comment", which precisely avoids the meaningful failure to answer, why didn't they ? The alternative only required a bit of imagination.

Meaningful failure to answer? Only to you.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 31, 2013, 05:59:44 PM
Let's face it it's true they would have denied it otherwise.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 31, 2013, 06:01:16 PM
Let's face it it's true they would have denied it otherwise.

Of course they would

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 06:02:21 PM
If they had been asked to say nothing that's exactly what they would do, say nothing. Just like...................them saying nothing.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 06:03:03 PM
Let's face it it's true they would have denied it otherwise.

why did you bring what is allegedly a false photo to this forum?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 06:14:34 PM
Has "they didn't deny it" ever been used to prove a case in a court of law anywhere in the world?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 31, 2013, 06:24:16 PM
it's true - deep down we all know it is
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 06:24:51 PM
The article gave quotes from the fund, Clarence Mitchell was 'unavailable to comment' on it and yet appeared a couple of days later to say that Tractoreman was 'pure speculation'.

It seems so blindingly obvious to me that this story is true, that peoples refusal to accept it is bordering on a kind of religious ferver. It's a bit like people not believing in evolution.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 06:29:15 PM
and it harmed the search?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on October 31, 2013, 06:30:36 PM
it's true - deep down we all know it is

Speak for yourself - it's a newspaper article.   Enuff said as far as I'm concerned.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 06:33:05 PM
how better to deflect action against themselves than to promote and publicise another possible abductor?

But for some reason they didn't?

How strange?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 31, 2013, 06:35:53 PM
The article gave quotes from the fund, Clarence Mitchell was 'unavailable to comment' on it and yet appeared a couple of days later to say that Tractoreman was 'pure speculation'.

It seems so blindingly obvious to me that this story is true, that peoples refusal to accept it is bordering on a kind of religious ferver. It's a bit like people not believing in evolution.

It is a bit like the Scopes Monkey Trial here at times 

The fact that Mitchell didn't want to put his name to any denial of the story was very telling,  I thought 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 06:46:24 PM
posts are so revealing
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 06:47:30 PM
Speak for yourself - it's a newspaper article.   Enuff said as far as I'm concerned.

the point is there is zero, nada, zilch, of anything of any kind to refute the contents....and never has been, by anybody....thats what you should be thinking about if you claim to be unbiased.....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 06:48:44 PM
No proof, either.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on October 31, 2013, 06:49:47 PM
Hitler Diaries
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 06:50:05 PM
No proof, either.



No ones talking proof, what proof would be good for you here btw? Out of interest.......

Oh and well done to the Times Insight investigative group, thin on the ground these kind of people compared to the mawkish hideously cowardly sycophantic rest of them
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 31, 2013, 06:51:16 PM
It is a bit like the Scopes Monkey Trial here at times 

That's seems incredible since 65 years earlier, in a famous debate on evolution in Oxford, the bishop Wilberforce asked T.H. Huxley, bulldog of Darwin and Aldous' grand father, if he descended from ape through his grand father or his grand mother. 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Jazzy on October 31, 2013, 06:53:10 PM
No ones talking proof, what proof would be good for you here btw? Out of interest.......

But you are always demanding proof.

Where's your proof, beyond a newspaper article that those efits were hidden?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 31, 2013, 06:54:52 PM
Hitler Diaries

Clifford Irving 8(0(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on October 31, 2013, 06:55:38 PM
But you are always demanding proof.

Where's your proof, beyond a newspaper article that those efits were hidden?

They were not seen from 2008 till 2013.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 06:56:53 PM
But you are always demanding proof.

Where's your proof, beyond a newspaper article that those efits were hidden?

Nope you have a bad memory is all...normally ask for some kind of back up/evidence..any..ehen some just spout stuff out and thrn some refuse to back it up, so tedious....off to watch some paint dry, more interesting, at least you see a result,  bbl though
 8((()*/

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 07:08:13 PM
Why would the McCanns supress information that might help find maddie
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 07:42:59 PM
Why would the McCanns supress information that might help find maddie

Didn't you read the Times article ?

The impression was it would reflect badly on the Mccanns.

It could also imply they knew the Smith sighting was irrelevant, unless you count of course the 60-80% probability. 8((()*/
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 07:49:13 PM
Didn't you read the Times article ?

The impression was it would reflect badly on the Mccanns.

It could also imply they knew the Smith sighting was irrelevant, unless you count of course the 60-80% probability. 8((()*/

yes read the times article...didn't think much of it...I still cant see what information they found that could have helped find maddie
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 31, 2013, 07:55:55 PM
Why would the McCanns supress information that might help find maddie

they wouldn't if their search was sincere
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 07:56:38 PM
yes read the times article...didn't think much of it...I still cant see what information they found that could have helped find maddie

So you think the Smith sighting is irrelevant ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 08:07:10 PM
It is a bit like the Scopes Monkey Trial here at times 

The fact that Mitchell didn't want to put his name to any denial of the story was very telling,  I thought

How is it like the Scopes trial?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 08:08:16 PM
They were not seen from 2008 till 2013.
By whom were they not seen. We do not know with whom they were shared.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on October 31, 2013, 08:09:49 PM
By whom were they not seen. We do not know with whom they were shared.

virtually the entire population of the world
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 08:11:45 PM
So you think the Smith sighting is irrelevant ?

According to the telegraph article the efits were handed to the PJ and SY... I am referring to their reports..also is there any proof for this statement...

 They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

How could exton not realise that halligan was a fraud?  None of it makes sense
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 31, 2013, 08:14:00 PM
According to the telegraph article the efits were handed to the PJ and SY... I am referring to their reports..also is there any proof for this statement...

 They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

How could exton not realise that halligan was a fraud?  None of it makes sense



None of it makes sense


Not too dissimilar to the McCanns account of 3rd May 2007 then.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 08:21:54 PM

None of it makes sense


Not too dissimilar to the McCanns account of 3rd May 2007 then.

Good to see you agree
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 08:37:26 PM

None of it makes sense


Not too dissimilar to the McCanns account of 3rd May 2007 then.

By the same token, why didn't the Mccanns know he was a fraud ?

After all, surely they checked people out before hiring them ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 08:41:56 PM
By the same token, why didn't the Mccanns know he was a fraud ?

After all, surely they checked people out before hiring them ?

I think you will find it was kennedy who hired them and Gerry who decided they were no good...halligan was a consummate conman who claimed to have worked for MI5...if exton had worked for MI5 surely you would expect him to suspect halligan  immediately..its his job, supposedly
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 08:47:40 PM
I think you will find it was kennedy who hired them and Gerry who decided they were no good...halligan was a consummate conman who claimed to have worked for MI5...if exton had worked for MI5 surely you would expect him to suspect halligan  immediately..its his job, supposedly

Was this the same Kennedy who visited the Smith famioly and had no business doing so ?

As to Exton, what information did he have access to ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 08:50:47 PM
Was this the same Kennedy who visited the Smith famioly and had no business doing so ?

As to Exton, what information did he have access to ?

Exton ..we a re told..was head of Oakley, as was halligen   so they must have met and discussed ..

Kannedy can visit who he likes.....its none of your business
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 08:54:53 PM
Exton ..we a re told..was head of Oakley, as was halligen   so they must have met and discussed ..

Kannedy can visit who he likes.....its none of your business

Kennedy was interfering with a witness.

A highly important point.

He had no business doing so.

That was the job of the police.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 08:55:43 PM
Kennedy was interfering with a witness.

A highly important point.

He had no business doing so.

That was the job of the police.

What do you mean 'interfering with a witness'. That is not any type of criminal offence anywhere that I know of.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 08:56:29 PM
Kennedy was interfering with a witness.

A highly important point.

He had no business doing so.

That was the job of the police.

When was the visit
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 08:57:52 PM
What do you mean 'interfering with a witness'. That is not any type of criminal offence anywhere that I know of.

he had no business seeing him.

That's the job of a police.

As to interfering with a potential witness, look it up.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 08:59:36 PM
he had no business seeing him.

That's the job of a police.

As to interfering with a potential witness, look it up.

was the visit after the case was shelved
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 31, 2013, 08:59:49 PM
Exton ..we a re told..was head of Oakley, as was halligen   so they must have met and discussed ..

Kannedy can visit who he likes.....its none of your business

Halligen  'sub contracted'  the actual investigative work to Henri Exton  (  in other words,  Exton was employed by Halligen on a contract  )

As far as I am aware,  no-one has ever disputed that Exton was the  'real deal'  and that he was,  in fact,  the only genuine professional  'abduction'  expert  to have ever been used by the McCanns

In the end,  of course,  they rejected his expert findings  and buried his report because it didn't support  the story they were telling
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 09:00:46 PM
Halligen  'sub contracted'  the actual investigative work  Henri Exton  (  in other words,  Exton was employed by Halligen on a contract  )

As far as I am aware,  no-one has ever disputed that Exton was the  'real deal'  and that he was,  in fact,  the only genuine professional  'abduction'  expert  to have ever been used by the McCanns

In the end,  of course,  they rejected his expert findings  and buried his report because it didn't support  the story they were telling

At least you are guessing that is what they did. No proof it was not shared.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on October 31, 2013, 09:00:59 PM
was the visit after the case was closed

I have had this discussion already.

The case was SHELVED, not closed.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 09:01:24 PM
was the visit after the case was closed

No

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P16/16_VOLUME_XVIa_Page_4135.jpg

jan 2008

(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P16/16_VOLUME_XVIa_Page_4135.jpg)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 09:01:29 PM
Halligen  'sub contracted'  the actual investigative work  Henri Exton  (  in other words,  Exton was employed by Halligen on a contract  )

As far as I am aware,  no-one has ever disputed that Exton was the  'real deal'  and that he was,  in fact,  the only genuine professional  'abduction'  expert  to have ever been used by the McCanns

In the end,  of course,  they rejected his expert findings  and buried his report because it didn't support  the story they were telling

So ..in short... you have no evidence that Exton was head of...for MI5
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 09:04:14 PM
No

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P16/16_VOLUME_XVIa_Page_4135.jpg

jan 2008

(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P16/16_VOLUME_XVIa_Page_4135.jpg)


 Wheres the word VIST...It says Kennedy contacted him
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 09:06:48 PM

 Whers the word VIST...It says Kennedy contacted him

not going to be dragged into minutae by you davel tonight, fact is, witnesses were pestered.....by someone working for the suspects at the time, how would that go down in this country?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 09:07:04 PM
he had no business seeing him.

That's the job of a police.

As to interfering with a potential witness, look it up.

Which law was broken in which jurisdiction. AN Englishman approaches an Irishman in Ireland about an event in Portugal.

Which law was broken? Which Jurisdiction.

You look it up and provide a link (it does not exist because you have made it up). You made the claim, you justify it with support please.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 09:08:51 PM
not going to be dragged into minutae by you davel tonight, fact is, witnesses were pestered.....by someone working for the suspects at the time, how would that go down in this country?

Theers a massive difference between contacting and visiting...thanks for the info
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on October 31, 2013, 09:08:55 PM
not going to be dragged into minutae by you davel tonight, fact is, witnesses were pestered.....by someone working for the suspects at the time, how would that go down in this country?

There is no law stopping defence lawyers employing private detectives to interview witnesses- unless you can produce a reference for such a non-existent law. The accused or suspected has an absolute right to seek evidence to defend themselves. They may not threaten or intimidate witnesses, but they may seek to question them.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on October 31, 2013, 09:11:47 PM
Theers a massive difference between contacting and visiting...thanks for the info

Kennedy visited Robert Murat, in Portugal, about nine months before the investigation was shelved.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: DCI on October 31, 2013, 09:13:26 PM
So ..in short... you have no evidence that Exton was head of...for MI5

Old story from the Mail 23 August 2008

Among the main players working on the McCann contract were Mr Halligen and Henri Exton, 57, who headed the Greater Manchester Police undercover unit until 1993. He then worked for the Government before moving into the private sector.

One day after a crisis meeting last week with the Madeleine fund administrators, Mr Halligen resigned as a director of RDI.

Mr Exton, of Bury, Lancashire, has the Queen’s Police Medal and an OBE. During the Seventies and Eighties his work included uncovering organised crime rings and recruiting supergrasses.

He also infiltrated football gangs, at one stage becoming a leader of the Young Guvnors, who followed Manchester City, and was forced to take part in organised incidents to preserve his cover.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id275.html
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 09:17:37 PM
Old story from the Mail 23 August 2008

Among the main players working on the McCann contract were Mr Halligen and Henri Exton, 57, who headed the Greater Manchester Police undercover unit until 1993. He then worked for the Government before moving into the private sector.

One day after a crisis meeting last week with the Madeleine fund administrators, Mr Halligen resigned as a director of RDI.

Mr Exton, of Bury, Lancashire, has the Queen’s Police Medal and an OBE. During the Seventies and Eighties his work included uncovering organised crime rings and recruiting supergrasses.

He also infiltrated football gangs, at one stage becoming a leader of the Young Guvnors, who followed Manchester City, and was forced to take part in organised incidents to preserve his cover.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id275.html

 They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

so is the Times article an accurate piece of investigative journalism ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 09:25:57 PM
Kennedy visited Robert Murat, in Portugal, about nine months before the investigation was shelved.

yes, Wilkins also complained about their *methods* when he was badgered
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 09:31:38 PM
There is no law stopping defence lawyers employing private detectives to interview witnesses- unless you can produce a reference for such a non-existent law. The accused or suspected has an absolute right to seek evidence to defend themselves. They may not threaten or intimidate witnesses, but they may seek to question them.

which defence lawyers employed Kennedy/Metodo 3/Oakley? And whatever other bunch


Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 09:49:57 PM
yes, Wilkins also complained about their *methods* when he was badgered

 When there is a little girl missing perhaps theres no room for politeness
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 10:14:11 PM
When there is a little girl missing perhaps theres no room for politeness

You mean  six months later? They suddenly got aggressive with him? When they were compiling a defence dossier after being made arguidos? oh my

Well, off topic a bit isnt  it anyway...fact remains NO ONE has confirmed that these efits were sent to the police......ie no named person.....no one is putting their name to it.....very telling indeed...whereas others are putting their name to it that they were not sent.....end of
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 10:17:48 PM
 ?>)()<
You mean  six months later? They suddenly got aggressive with him? When they were compiling a defence dossier after being made arguidos? oh my


 When there is a little girl missing perhaps theres no room for politeness
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 10:18:38 PM
?>)()<

 When there is a little girl missing perhaps theres no room for politeness

Being an intransigent parrot rarely helps
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 31, 2013, 10:29:58 PM
You mean  six months later? They suddenly got aggressive with him? When they were compiling a defence dossier after being made arguidos? oh my
It had nothing to do with politeness. JW felt pressured, they insisted and even called him on his work line. JW loves nothing like his freedom. So when he says something he takes care not to compromise himself. He described Mr McCann as being from 5'1" to 6' in height !!! and he met him between 20h45 and 21h15, though his child was asleep and he was back home !!!
JW, after Mr Oldfield woke him up, just when the PJ arrived, thought he should tell the police that he had met a weirdo, with rasta and army like clothes !
And so he did. The following day, nice chap !
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on October 31, 2013, 10:34:52 PM
To get back on track..

 They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

so is the Times article an accurate piece of investigative journalism ?  I think we all know its aload of rubbish
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 10:38:56 PM
To get back on track..

 They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

so is the Times article an accurate piece of investigative journalism ?  I think we all know its aload of rubbish

Youre no mouthpiece for all posters here, reign yourself in mate LOL......before you get some delusion of grandeur oooooer
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 10:40:20 PM
It had nothing to do with politeness. JW felt pressured, they insisted and even called him on his work line. JW loves nothing like his freedom. So when he says something he takes care not to compromise himself. He described Mr McCann as being from 5'1" to 6' in height !!! and he met him between 20h45 and 21h15, though his child was asleep and he was back home !!!
JW, after Mr Oldfield woke him up, just when the PJ arrived, thought he should tell the police that he had met a weirdo, with rasta and army like clothes !
And so he did. The following day, nice chap !

Ive read and seen enough  to think the Mccies and their cohorts were nothing short of bullies many a time.....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 31, 2013, 10:58:48 PM
I've some notion of that, I suppose...
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on October 31, 2013, 11:02:49 PM
I've some notion of that, I suppose...

I thnk MANY Anne, some worse than others,  its awful,either way, nite now, lets try NOT to live a wished life of fear and misery hey? In general or specifically of losing our houses!!!! nasty vermin

 @)(++(*





Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: faithlilly on October 31, 2013, 11:09:49 PM
Old story from the Mail 23 August 2008

Among the main players working on the McCann contract were Mr Halligen and Henri Exton, 57, who headed the Greater Manchester Police undercover unit until 1993. He then worked for the Government before moving into the private sector.

One day after a crisis meeting last week with the Madeleine fund administrators, Mr Halligen resigned as a director of RDI.

Mr Exton, of Bury, Lancashire, has the Queen’s Police Medal and an OBE. During the Seventies and Eighties his work included uncovering organised crime rings and recruiting supergrasses.

He also infiltrated football gangs, at one stage becoming a leader of the Young Guvnors, who followed Manchester City, and was forced to take part in organised incidents to preserve his cover.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id275.html

An OBE no less. Doesn't sound like the kind of professional who'd be telling untruths to the media, now does he ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on October 31, 2013, 11:22:30 PM
An OBE no less. Doesn't sound like the kind of professional who'd be telling untruths to the media, now does he ?

And not the sort of bloke the papers would  name as a  'source'   unless he  was  
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: faithlilly on October 31, 2013, 11:32:12 PM
And not the sort of bloke the papers would  name as a  'source'   unless he  was

Absolutely Icabod.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 01, 2013, 12:39:02 AM
As far as I can see, no-one has given a  logical or reasonable explanation for rejecting The Times  article  ...  which appears to be a well sourced piece of investigative journalism
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 01, 2013, 06:43:22 AM
As far as I can see, no-one has given a  logical or reasonable explanation for rejecting The Times  article  ...  which appears to be a well sourced piece of investigative journalism

Which, like all journalism may be partially correct.

There may well be (and probably certainly are) other facts as yet unknown about the story.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on November 01, 2013, 07:29:59 AM
As far as I can see, no-one has given a  logical or reasonable explanation for rejecting The Times  article  ...  which appears to be a well sourced piece of investigative journalism

bomb proof - let's face it it's true
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 01, 2013, 07:48:20 AM
bomb proof - let's face it it's true

Unless there are communications not known to the Times or to us.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 01, 2013, 07:56:02 AM
And not the sort of bloke the papers would  name as a  'source'   unless he  was

Jimmy Saville was knighted...an OBE doesn't confirm anything
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 01, 2013, 08:01:48 AM
So no on has been able to refute the fact that the times was wrong...

 They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

so is the Times article an accurate piece of investigative journalism ?  I think we all know its aload of rubbish

If you want to believe it that's up to you but if its wrong it means all your conclusions are wrong.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on November 01, 2013, 02:42:15 PM

so is the Times article an accurate piece of investigative journalism ?  I think we all know its aload of rubbish

If you want to believe it that's up to you but if its wrong it means all your conclusions are wrong.

davel bringing you sweeping statements and oversimplifications since 1985  8((()*/
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on November 01, 2013, 02:49:19 PM
davel bringing you sweeping statements and oversimplifications since 1985  8((()*/

Another comment about a poster and not the topic.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on November 03, 2013, 08:43:34 PM
so not looking so clever for The Times (in various titles) is it.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on November 04, 2013, 08:39:53 AM
So no on has been able to refute the fact that the times was wrong...


Actually noone's said it was wrong so nothing to refute. It's true and we all know it.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on November 04, 2013, 08:58:54 AM
Actually noone's said it was wrong so nothing to refute. It's true and we all know it.

So do you accept as true the assertion that Mr. Smith has stressed that he no longer regards Gerry as the man he saw?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on November 04, 2013, 09:05:37 AM
So do you accept as true the assertion that Mr. Smith has stressed that he no longer regards Gerry as the man he saw?


Do we have that from Mr. Smith's lips ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Luz on November 04, 2013, 09:09:17 AM

Do we have that from Mr. Smith's lips ?

Of course not.

(http://i58.servimg.com/u/f58/14/44/02/75/gerry_15.jpg)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on November 04, 2013, 09:42:15 AM
No surprise on that then.

Another photo of the unhappy couple.

As there are scores of photographs with the McCanns looking totally devastated  - posting this picture is just a spiteful deflection IMO.      Anyone who thinks the McCanns had no right to smile - ever - in the last 6 years needs to explain why.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Angelo222 on November 04, 2013, 10:14:48 AM
So do you accept as true the assertion that Mr. Smith has stressed that he no longer regards Gerry as the man he saw?

Mr Smith has no choice as Gerry was at the tapas when the Smiths saw the carrier.

And this is off topic!!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: jassi on November 04, 2013, 10:53:10 AM
As there are scores of photographs with the McCanns looking totally devastated  - posting this picture is just a spiteful deflection IMO.      Anyone who thinks the McCanns had no right to smile - ever - in the last 6 years needs to explain why.

Are you not happy for them that they can look so cheerful in the face of adversity ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 04, 2013, 04:10:32 PM
Could suppressing those e fits be regarded as perverting the course of justice  ?   ( given that it appears they were withheld from Scotland Yard whilst they were investigating the case  ) 

I don't just mean with regard to the McCanns,  but with regard to Exton too  ...  and the legal firm who made threats in order to ensure his silence 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on November 04, 2013, 04:15:01 PM
Could suppressing those e fits be regarded as perverting the course of justice  ?   ( given that it appears they were withheld from Scotland Yard whilst they were investigating the case  ) 

I don't just mean with regard to the McCanns,  but with regard to Exton too  ...  and the legal firm who made threats in order to ensure his silence

Publishing the efits (apart from an official enquiry) could be regarded as libel
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 04, 2013, 04:19:30 PM
Publishing the efits (apart from an official enquiry) could be regarded as libel

I wasn't talking about  'publishing'  them ...  I was refering to  passing them to the police 

(  and who,  exactly would have been  'libelled'  if the McCanns  had  published them, anyway  ?  )
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on November 04, 2013, 04:21:07 PM
I wasn't talking about  'publishing'  them ...  I was refering to  passing them to the police 

(  and who,  exactly would have been  'libelled'  if the McCanns  had  published them, anyway  ?  )

As likely as not, they were passed to the police, and stamped as irrelevant by Paivia
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 04, 2013, 04:24:42 PM
As likely as not, they were passed to the police, and stamped as irrelevant by Paivia

Neither the ,McCanns nor Clarence Michell  has made any claim that the e fits were passed to   ANY  police   ( including Scotland Yard  ) 

I was just wondering if wilfully withholding crucial information from a police investigation could be seen  ( legally  )  as perverting the course of justice 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on November 04, 2013, 04:32:35 PM
As likely as not, they were passed to the police, and stamped as irrelevant by Paivia

Ridiculous to suggest efits of smithman were passed to police and marked irrelevant......
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on November 04, 2013, 04:37:09 PM
Neither the ,McCanns nor Clarence Michell  has made any claim that the e fits were passed to   ANY  police   ( including Scotland Yard  ) 

I was just wondering if wilfully withholding crucial information from a police investigation could be seen  ( legally  )  as perverting the course of justice

not only have they never made any claim they have not even whispered as to their existence anywhere in five years, neither has anyone else....until the Times investigative Insight Team found out about them....not sure about perverting the course of justice.....not in a legal sense anyway but if true thoroughly abhorrent to hold onto such information....a massive stone...unturned
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on November 04, 2013, 04:41:56 PM
Neither the ,McCanns nor Clarence Michell  has made any claim that the e fits were passed to   ANY  police   ( including Scotland Yard

I was just wondering if wilfully withholding crucial information from a police investigation could be seen  ( legally  )  as perverting the course of justice

A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: jassi on November 04, 2013, 04:43:44 PM
A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.


That must imply that it was only passed on after the start of the review.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on November 04, 2013, 04:48:18 PM
That must imply that it was only passed on after the start of the review.

Leading up to a re-opening the case -- the only legitimate context in which such an efit could be released.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on November 04, 2013, 05:07:39 PM
One point that I wouldn't dispute is that I hadn't seen those e-fits before, but - aside from that - much of that article seems so tabloidish, I find it hard to assess what's fact and what isn't.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 04, 2013, 05:10:44 PM
Leading up to a re-opening the case -- the only legitimate context in which such an efit could be released.

Are you saying that publishing the  the e fits of Cooperman,  Spotty man,  Victoria Beckam lookie-likie et al,  was  not legitimate  ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on November 04, 2013, 05:12:06 PM
Are you saying that publishing the  the e fits of Cooperman,  Spotty man,  Victoria Beckam lookie-likie et al,  was  not legitimate  ?

See my earlier post ....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 04, 2013, 05:13:44 PM
One point that I wouldn't dispute is that I hadn't seen those e-fits before, but - aside from that - much of that article seems so tabloidish, I find it hard to assess what's fact and what isn't.

I could not disagree more.  I found the article in The Times to be a clear and well sourced piece of investigative journalism   (  not  'tabloidish'  in the least   ...  no hyperbole or sensationilsm at all,  in fact  ) 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 04, 2013, 05:19:51 PM
See my earlier post ....

Which post are you refering to  ?

I've read back and I can't see where you have given a reason for suggesting publishing the Smithman  e fit would not have  have been  'legitimate'  until this late date  ...  whilst publishing the rest of the e fits  (  Cooperman,  Spotty man,  Posh Spice  and all the rest  )   somehow  WAS   'legitimate'

What is your reasoning for making that distinction  ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on November 04, 2013, 05:25:46 PM
I could not disagree more.  I found the article in The Times to be a clear and well sourced piece of investigative journalism   (  not  'tabloidish'  in the least   ...  no hyperbole or sensationilsm at all,  in fact  )

I find The Times to be well researched, although any media can make mistakes on occasion. The Sunday Times is a separate entity to The Times, isn't it? Does it have the same reputation? Who are those journalists?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 04, 2013, 05:33:23 PM
I find The Times to be well researched, although any media can make mistakes on occasion. The Sunday Times is a separate entity to The Times, isn't it? Does it have the same reputation? Who are those journalists?

The two investigative journalists involved  ( can't think of their names off the top of my head, sorry  )  had previously been succesfully sued   ( together with the Times  )   for libelling a politician  (  I can't think of his name either,  I'm afraid   )

In the spirit of  'once bitten, twice shy'  I think it's fair to assume the Times legal people went through the article with a tooth comb before allowing publication 

Certainly,  there has been no rebuttal or denial from the McCanns 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on November 04, 2013, 05:45:52 PM
Could suppressing those e fits be regarded as perverting the course of justice  ?   ( given that it appears they were withheld from Scotland Yard whilst they were investigating the case  ) 

I don't just mean with regard to the McCanns,  but with regard to Exton too  ...  and the legal firm who made threats in order to ensure his silence

I believe that doing nothing is not enough for a charge of perverting the course of justice. They could easily claim that they didn't see the necessity for example.

" The Offence
3. Perverting the course of justice is a serious offence. It can only be tried on indictment and carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The offence is committed where a person:

does an act (a positive act or series of acts is required; mere inaction is insufficient)
which has a tendency to pervert and
which is intended to pervert
the course of public justice."

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/perverting_the_course_of_justice_-_rape_and_dv_allegations/

Ah, there you are!

As far as I understand it, it's the difference between noticing blood on your partners jeans and not calling the police and washing blood out of your partners jeans.

It's possible that using a solicitor to prevent someone else publishing the efits could be seen as perverting the corse of justice I suppose, but not doing it themselves isn't a crime.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 04, 2013, 05:57:21 PM
Why was Mr Exton surprised, according to the Sunday Times, by a breaking news he had known for 5 years, if he really released the e-fits after being informed there would no legal consequences ?
How long before Crimewatch could SY have had the e-fits ? Wouldn't they have suppressed the obsolete moving door (they suppressed so many things) if they had had then the e-fits ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on November 04, 2013, 06:27:06 PM
The two investigative journalists involved  ( can't think of their names off the top of my head, sorry  )  had previously been succesfully sued   ( together with the Times  )   for libelling a politician  (  I can't think of his name either,  I'm afraid   )

In the spirit of  'once bitten, twice shy'  I think it's fair to assume the Times legal people went through the article with a tooth comb before allowing publication 

Certainly,  there has been no rebuttal or denial from the McCanns

No direct rebuttal, no. Except to say that they won't be commenting on press speculation.

From that article, the only direct quote attributed to Exton seems to be this:
Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

What was this letter? A termination letter from a solicitor? If so, what would seem strange about a confidentiality clause?

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 04, 2013, 06:44:43 PM
No direct rebuttal, no. Except to say that they won't be commenting on press speculation.

From that article, the only direct quote attributed to Exton seems to be this:
Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

What was this letter? A termination letter from a solicitor? If so, what would seem strange about a confidentiality clause?

Carana,  the McCanns used lawyers to   silence  Henri Exton  ...  then they suppressed his report and the e fits that came with it 

How you,  or anyone else,  can say that is not a shocking revelation  (  and one that is extremely damaging to the McCanns )   is beyond me 

I can only  assume it is a case of  trying to minimise the gravity of the charge laid out in The Times article
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on November 04, 2013, 07:00:50 PM
Carana,  the McCanns used lawyers to   silence  Henri Exton  ...  then they suppressed his report and the e fits that came with it 

How you,  or anyone else,  can say that is not a shocking revelation  (  and one that is extremely damaging to the McCanns )   is beyond me 

I can only  assume it is a case of  trying to minimise the gravity of the charge laid out in The Times article

No they didn't.

Just standard confidentiality clauses scandalously misrepresented as something different by The Times
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 04, 2013, 07:03:56 PM
Except to say that they won't be commenting on press speculation.
Was the e-fits omission a press speculation ?
They commented on Tractorman press speculation... they revealed it was "speculation" !
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: jassi on November 04, 2013, 07:04:50 PM
No they didn't.

Just standard confidentiality clauses scandalously misrepresented as something different by The Times[/i]

And how, exactly, do you know this for certain ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 04, 2013, 07:06:59 PM
Carana,  the McCanns used lawyers to   silence  Henri Exton  ...  then they suppressed his report and the e fits that came with it 

How you,  or anyone else,  can say that is not a shocking revelation  (  and one that is extremely damaging to the McCanns )   is beyond me 

I can only  assume it is a case of  trying to minimise the gravity of the charge laid out in The Times article

 Extremely damaging to the McCanns you say...extremely damaging..so tell me...what damage has it done?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on November 04, 2013, 07:09:41 PM
And how, exactly, do you know this for certain ?

Isn't it a wonderful thing that the McCanns miraculously released Exton from this "repression" (on "free-speech") to talk to The Times?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 04, 2013, 07:11:37 PM
Isn't it a wonderful thing that the McCanns miraculously released Exton from this "repression" (on "free-speech") to talk to The Times?

 Did they?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on November 04, 2013, 07:12:27 PM
Did they?

No!

I'm being sarcastic.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on November 04, 2013, 07:22:26 PM
No!

I'm being sarcastic.

Do you object to the truth coming out ?

P.S. I'm not being sarcastic
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on November 04, 2013, 07:27:25 PM
Do you object to the truth coming out ?

P.S. I'm not being sarcastic

The bit of the truth we are waiting for is who abducted Madeleine.  And what happened to Madeleine.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 04, 2013, 07:31:49 PM
Isn't it a wonderful thing that the McCanns miraculously released Exton from this "repression" (on "free-speech") to talk to The Times?

They didn't have much choice did they  ...  what were they going to say to Scotland Yard  ?

"No,  we will not instruct our lawyers to withdraw threats of legal action so Henri Exton can give you the report you want to see "  ? 

That  IS  the most likely scenario isn't it  ? ...  Exton contacts Scotland Yard and says he has information that is certainly of interest to their investigation but that he is unable to give it to them because the McCann lawyers have made threats of legal action

So Scotland Yard go the McCanns and tells them they want to see the information Exton has,  so would they lift the legal threats preventing  them from doing so 

The McCanns  have  to do it 

I can't see any other logical explanation for what has happened here 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: jassi on November 04, 2013, 07:32:57 PM
The bit of the truth we are waiting for is who abducted Madeleine.  And what happened to Madeleine.

I fear we might be waiting a long time for that
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on November 04, 2013, 07:34:49 PM
They didn't have much choice did they  ...  what were they going to say to Scotland Yard  ?

"No,  we will not instruct our lawyers to withdraw threats of legal action so Henri Exton can give you the report you want to see "  ? 

That  IS  the most likely scenario isn't it  ? ...  Exton contacts Scotland Yard and says he has information that is certainly of interest to their investigation but that he is unable to give it to them because the McCann lawyers have made threats of legal action

So Scotland Yard go the McCanns and tells them they want to see the information Exton has,  so would they lift the legal threats preventing  them from doing so 

The McCanns  have  to do it 

I can't see any other logical explanation for what has happened here 

What on earth are you on about?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 04, 2013, 07:42:43 PM
What on earth are you on about?

The Times article says that Scotland Yard got a copy of the report from the author  (  Henri Exton  )   

If they had to ask  him  for a copy of his report   (  which included the  e fits  )   then it clearly wasn't in the private detective files that the McCanns had given them, was it  ? 

Who do you   think told Scotland Yard about the report   and e fits  ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on November 04, 2013, 07:45:09 PM
The two investigative journalists involved  ( can't think of their names off the top of my head, sorry  )  had previously been succesfully sued   ( together with the Times  )   for libelling a politician  (  I can't think of his name either,  I'm afraid   )

In the spirit of  'once bitten, twice shy'  I think it's fair to assume the Times legal people went through the article with a tooth comb before allowing publication 

Certainly,  there has been no rebuttal or denial from the McCanns

Is this the litigation in question concerning these journalists?

Sunday Times loses Cruddas libel battle, pays £180,000 plus costs
31/07/2013
By: Media Lawyer

Former Conservative Party co-treasurer Peter Cruddas was today awarded £180,000 in damages in his High Court libel action over a Sunday Times allegation about charging £250,000 to meet David Cameron.

The 59-year-old businessman had sued Times Newspapers Ltd and two members of the newspaper's Insight team over three articles which appeared in March 2012.

He complained the articles meant that, in return for cash donations to the Conservative party, he corruptly offered for sale the opportunity to influence government policy and gain unfair advantage through secret meetings with the Prime Minister and other senior ministers.

During the litigation, the Court of Appeal ruled that, in relation to the libel claim, "corruptly" meant "inappropriate, unacceptable and wrong and gave rise to an impression of impropriety".

Mr Cruddas also said the articles meant he made the offer even though he knew the money offered for meetings was to come, in breach of the ban under UK electoral law, from Middle Eastern investors in a Liechtenstein fund and that he was happy that the foreign donors should use deceptive devices to conceal the true source of the donation.

The newspaper, which also has to make a £500,000 payment towards Mr Cruddas' costs by mid-August, had pleaded justification.

Mr Cruddas also succeeded in his claim for malicious falsehood but no separate damages award was made in respect of that today, because, Mr Justice Tugendhat explained, while he had held that the defendants had acted maliciously, and that the articles were likely to cause him pecuniary damage in respect of his profession and business, he could not recover twice for the same damage.

Page 2

Mr Cruddas said later: "The dark cloud that has hung over me and my family since the Sunday Times published its malicious lies about me 16 months ago has finally been lifted and justice has been done.

"My world was turned upside-down when that article was published.

"I remember vividly having to walk into my offices the day after the article was published and face 500 of my staff, many of whom had a clip of the Sunday Times interview on their video screens. It was humiliating.

"I was also embarrassed to accept invites to events, which meant that my charities suffered.

"The Conservative Party cut me off within two hours of the story breaking and did not want to hear my side of the story.

"I was constructively dismissed from my role as party treasurer and made to feel like an outcast as the Prime Minister and the party lined up to criticise me on television and radio. This hurt me immensely and further damaged my reputation.

"Since the article was published I have kept a dignified silence and let the legal process do the talking for me.

"Perhaps the Sunday Times under-estimated me and thought I would quietly disappear but I knew all along that I was telling the truth and that the story was malicious, so I was prepared to fight all the way.

"I hope my victory shows that this type of journalism employed by the Sunday Times and its journalists Heidi Blake and Jonathan Calvert is totally unacceptable, particularly post-Leveson."

He added: "Today is a good day for me. I am delighted that my good name has been restored. My family, friends and legal team have shown me huge support throughout, which has kept me going, and I sincerely thank them."

Jeremy Clarke-Williams, senior principal lawyer at Slater & Gordon Lawyers, who represented Mr Cruddas, said: "This is a devastating and unequivocal judgment which provides the clear vindication Mr Cruddas deserves.

"We are delighted that his reputation as a successful and honest businessman and generous philanthropist has been restored.

"Although the Sunday Times continually maintained both before and during the litigation that this was public interest journalism, they did not defend the case on that basis and clearly there can never be a public interest in publishing malicious and damaging lies.

"One can only hope that important lessons will be learned from this case about the proper conduct of investigative journalism."
http://www.societyofeditors.co.uk/page-view.php?pagename=Courts&parent_page_id=149&news_id=6172&numbertoprintfrom=1&language={language}
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on November 04, 2013, 07:49:23 PM
The bit of the truth we are waiting for is who abducted Madeleine.  And what happened to Madeleine.

The mysterious abduction with nae proof, and that's after 6 and a half years of absolutely nothing being found.

No sarcasm there either.

Merely the truth.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on November 04, 2013, 07:52:38 PM
Carana,  the McCanns used lawyers to   silence  Henri Exton  ...  then they suppressed his report and the e fits that came with it 

How you,  or anyone else,  can say that is not a shocking revelation  (  and one that is extremely damaging to the McCanns )   is beyond me 

I can only  assume it is a case of  trying to minimise the gravity of the charge laid out in The Times article

- The article seems to be cleverly worded (possibly to avoid libel)... but I find much of it to be tabloidesque. I chose Exton as an example as people across the board assume that he was the one who leaked. Aside from that one quote, nothing else seems to be directly attributable to him.

- The article suggests the "suppression" of their report... When were these e-fits done? Would a company only send them on once they'd done a final report in the case of a missing child, or send on potentially important information as and when they came across it?

- Suppressed from whom? Who were they supposed to send information to? Kate and Gerry personally? The Fund? The police?

- Who, aside from possibly Exton, was ex-MI5?

- Which "hypercritical" aspects are anything more than what is contained in the files?

- ...


Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 04, 2013, 08:04:00 PM
I see you have a lot to investigate, Carana ! We look forward for your findings.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on November 04, 2013, 08:08:18 PM
I see you have a lot to investigate, Carana ! We look forward for your findings.

If you have answers, I'd be interested in reading them.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 04, 2013, 08:11:22 PM
If you have answers, I'd be interested in reading them.
Prefabricated answers, surely not.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 04, 2013, 08:33:07 PM
- The article seems to be cleverly worded (possibly to avoid libel)... but I find much of it to be tabloidesque. I chose Exton as an example as people across the board assume that he was the one who leaked. Aside from that one quote, nothing else seems to be directly attributable to him.

- The article suggests the "suppression" of their report... When were these e-fits done? Would a company only send them on once they'd done a final report in the case of a missing child, or send on potentially important information as and when they came across it?

- Suppressed from whom? Who were they supposed to send information to? Kate and Gerry personally? The Fund? The police?

- Who, aside from possibly Exton, was ex-MI5?

- Which "hypercritical" aspects are anything more than what is contained in the files?

- ...

what evidence is there that exton was mi5
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: jassi on November 04, 2013, 08:45:11 PM
what evidence is there that exton was mi5

Just google his name, though no doubt you won't want to accept any of the entries.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 04, 2013, 08:56:04 PM
Just google his name, though no doubt you won't want to accept any of the entries.

I don't count morais and the like as legitimate sources..the only references seem to be anti McCann blogs..nothing independent ...yet there are independent reports of his police career///and of course his shoplifting episode
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 04, 2013, 09:11:53 PM
now what would a superspy be doing getting caught shoplifting AND accepting police caution
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 04, 2013, 09:12:49 PM
Sounds a bit more Jonny English than James Bond
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on November 04, 2013, 09:20:25 PM
Over a week and still no denial. Yep it's all true.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 04, 2013, 09:24:14 PM
Over a week and still no denial. Yep it's all true.

 yes its all true.. a bit like Amarals book...a whole year and no denial
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on November 04, 2013, 09:26:24 PM
I think the efits could not be shown until the case is reopened

Did Portugal reopen the case before or after the crimewatch programme ?

Portugals law is so complex and has so many rules regarding information .i remember the mccanns not being allowed to say jack regarding the case and a lot of people slating them for not talking .

The mccanns were not allowed to do anything in Portugal while case was shelved ,private investigators were not allowed to investigate the case either I think ,maybe they broke the rules getting the efit done from mr smith.
Some deal has probably been done to release the efit now and not charge anyone for them ?..
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on November 04, 2013, 09:44:25 PM
I think the efits could not be shown until the case is reopened

Did Portugal reopen the case before or after the crimewatch programme ?

Portugals law is so complex and has so many rules regarding information .i remember the mccanns not being allowed to say jack regarding the case and a lot of people slating them for not talking .

The mccanns were not allowed to do anything in Portugal while case was shelved ,private investigators were not allowed to investigate the case either I think ,maybe they broke the rules getting the efit done from mr smith.
Some deal has probably been done to release the efit now and not charge anyone for them ?..

They released two efits before the case was shelved and two after, nothing stopped them then
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: icabodcrane on November 04, 2013, 09:49:16 PM
I think the efits could not be shown until the case is reopened

Did Portugal reopen the case before or after the crimewatch programme ?

Portugals law is so complex and has so many rules regarding information .i remember the mccanns not being allowed to say jack regarding the case and a lot of people slating them for not talking .

The mccanns were not allowed to do anything in Portugal while case was shelved ,private investigators were not allowed to investigate the case either I think ,maybe they broke the rules getting the efit done from mr smith.
Some deal has probably been done to release the efit now and not charge anyone for them ?..

What  'special rule'  do you think applied to the Smithman e fit that did not   apply to all the other e fits shown on the McCanns'  official website,  and in Kate's book  ?   
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on November 04, 2013, 09:50:47 PM
They released two efits before the case was shelved and two after, nothing stopped them then

2 from the  files  which were public ?

The other two were done while they were not supposed to be investigating ?

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on November 04, 2013, 09:54:40 PM
What  'special rule'  do you think applied to the Smithman e fit that did not   apply to all the other e fits shown on the McCanns'  official website,  and in Kate's book  ?

They were not allowed by law to investigate in Portugal ,the smith sighting efits were done while they should not have been ?? Martin smith must have been spoken to by he mccanns investigators while the case was open ??
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on November 04, 2013, 09:55:21 PM
2 from the  files  which were public ?

The other two were done while they were not supposed to be investigating ?

No Kaz, none of the mccann released efits were from the files......they were all commissioned by their own sketch artists PIs what have you
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on November 04, 2013, 09:57:29 PM
No Kaz, none of the mccann released efits were from the files......they were all commissioned by their own sketch artists PIs what have you

I'll have to go over the  press again I know the guy with the coller length hair is on the files

Ok ta
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on November 04, 2013, 10:02:46 PM
I'll have to go over the  press again I know the guy with the coller length hair is on the files

Ok ta

Both Tannerman and Cooperman are in the files but were nothing to do with the Pj, maybe I misunderstood your point, here you go


http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/POWERPOINT.htm
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on November 04, 2013, 10:12:48 PM

The McCanns were accused of using diversion tactics 
By Caroline Gammell in Praia da Luz1:25PM BST 25 Sep 2007
Kate and Gerry McCann provoked the fury of the Portuguese authorities after it was revealed they had hired private investigators to help find their daughter Madeleine.

In full: The Madeleine McCann case
The couple were accused by police of employing "diversion tactics".
A senior judge said their actions could prompt charges of obstruction of justice in the hunt for the missing four-year-old who has not been seen since May 3.
Under Portuguese law, it is illegal to carry out independent inquiries into a case while a police investigation is ongoing. But it emerged this week that Mr and Mrs McCann hired investigators from Control Risks Group - who specialise in kidnap, hostage and crisis management - at the end of May.
Related Articles
McCanns hired detective firm with ex-SAS men 24 Sep 2007
Madeleine McCann police 'must find her body' 24 Sep 2007
A source close to the couple's legal team insisted they were only working in an advisory role and were not on the ground in Portugal.
But the company – which employs ex-SAS and military personnel – is thought to be focusing on Spain and Morocco, where three sightings of a little blonde girl have now been reported.
In Portugal, figures from both the police and judicial arenas vented their anger about the move.
Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of activity has no legal standing.
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on November 04, 2013, 10:14:42 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1564121/Madeleine-McCann-police-fury-over-private-hunt.html

Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of activity has no legal standing.
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."





So they must have investigated Martin smith behind pjs back .
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on November 04, 2013, 10:18:29 PM
kazzcutt ...I had you down as pro  >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on November 04, 2013, 10:22:38 PM
kazzcutt ...I had you down as pro  >@@(*&)

 8-)(--)
I'd rather stay with facts (whatever we know )

If someone took my child and I was told your looking at ten years for talking or investigating
I would hire people and do it behind their back .

I'm not going to lick the mccanns ass because I have hope for Madeleine ,I'm interested in Madeleine whereabouts more

I hate it when [ censored word ] think the mccanns can't do nothing wrong just like [ censored word] the way they treat amaral like a god

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on November 04, 2013, 10:29:53 PM
8-)(--)
I'd rather stay with facts (whatever we know )

If someone took my child and I was told your looking at ten years for talking or investigating
I would hire people and do it behind their back .

I'm not going to lick the mccanns ass because I have hope for Madeleine ,I'm interested in Madeleine whereabouts more

I hate it when [ censored word ] think the mccanns can't do nothing wrong just like [ censored word] the way they treat amaral like a god


that's a fair comment ...thanks for being honest ... 8((()*/

what do you think of the mccanns being accused of involvement in madeleines disappearance ...?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on November 04, 2013, 10:42:29 PM

that's a fair comment ...thanks for being honest ... 8((()*/

what do you think of the mccanns being accused of involvement in madeleines disappearance ...?

I thought pj/sy have said they are no longer suspects and believe she was abducted .

My own thoughts  ,I still believe this case is  far deeper
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: sadie on November 04, 2013, 10:44:12 PM
The McCanns were accused of using diversion tactics
By Caroline Gammell in Praia da Luz1:25PM BST 25 Sep 2007
Kate and Gerry McCann provoked the fury of the Portuguese authorities after it was revealed they had hired private investigators to help find their daughter Madeleine.

In full: The Madeleine McCann case
The couple were accused by police of employing "diversion tactics".
A senior judge said their actions could prompt charges of obstruction of justice in the hunt for the missing four-year-old who has not been seen since May 3.
Under Portuguese law, it is illegal to carry out independent inquiries into a case while a police investigation is ongoing. But it emerged this week that Mr and Mrs McCann hired investigators from Control Risks Group - who specialise in kidnap, hostage and crisis management - at the end of May.
Related Articles
McCanns hired detective firm with ex-SAS men 24 Sep 2007
Madeleine McCann police 'must find her body' 24 Sep 2007
A source close to the couple's legal team insisted they were only working in an advisory role and were not on the ground in Portugal.
But the company – which employs ex-SAS and military personnel – is thought to be focusing on Spain and Morocco, where three sightings of a little blonde girl have now been reported.
In Portugal, figures from both the police and judicial arenas vented their anger about the move.
Antonio Martins, president of the National Association of Portuguese Judges, told the newspaper 24 Horas: "It is still up to the state to carry out criminal investigation. That kind of activity has no legal standing.
"Anything that results from private investigation has no substance."
Mr Martins said the private detectives and even the McCanns themselves could be accused of "obstruction of justice".
Carlos Anjos, the head of Portugal's criminal police federation, added: "This can only be another diversion tactic from the McCanns. It is nothing but folklore.
"Portugal does not have legislation in this area. Private detectives who intervene in criminal cases cannot exist.
"The law only tolerates private detectives who gather information and only about matters of the private lives of certain people like extramarital relationships."
A separate police source warned that the involvement of investigators may not only be illegal but could have a detrimental effect on the inquiry.
The high ranking official told newspaper Correio da Manha: "If private investigators come here they will be running a serious risk of being arrested."
Well they did their investigations out of PT, didn't they?   ... so they crossed no PJ boundaries


PT and the PJ were extraordinarily touchy about getting any assistance ... weren't they?  wonder if they were frightened of being shown up ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on November 04, 2013, 10:48:12 PM
Well they did their investigations out of PT, didn't they?   ... so they crossed no PJ boundaries


PT and the PJ were extraordinarily touchy about getting any assistance ... weren't they?  wonder if they were frightened of being shown up ?

Dunno about being shown up its law out there.
I don't believe for a second the ex sas didn't go to Portugal for one bit .
Makes sense to me why the efits were not shown until now .
I'm just glad it's reopened
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on November 04, 2013, 10:50:48 PM
I thought pj/sy have said they are no longer suspects and believe she was abducted .

My own thoughts  ,I still believe this case is  far deeper


should of made myself more clear  ...wasn't referring to sy or pj ....was referring to amaral and the anti's accusing the mccanns of involvement ....

deeper as in  ...?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: sadie on November 04, 2013, 10:54:45 PM

should of made myself more clear  ...wasn't referring to sy or pj ....was referring to amaral and the anti's accusing the mccanns of involvement ....

deeper as in  ...?

I believe it is far deeper too, Kazcutt. 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on November 04, 2013, 10:56:32 PM

should of made myself more clear  ...wasn't referring to sy or pj ....was referring to amaral and the anti's accusing the mccanns of involvement ....

deeper as in  ...?


Amaral knows nothing of the new investigation and the pj said they would only open if there was a good enough reason to
[ censored word]?.. Have no say in which way the case will go it doesn't matter what is said sy and the pj (new team ) know something
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Kazcutt on November 04, 2013, 10:59:18 PM
I believe it is far deeper too, Kazcutt.

I just have to many thoughts ,the [ censored word] would kart me off in a white coat if I spoke about alf of them lol
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 04, 2013, 10:59:49 PM

Amaral knows nothing of the new investigation and the pj said they would only open if there was a good enough reason to
[ censored word]?.. Have no say in which way the case will go it doesn't matter what is said sy and the pj (new team ) know something

That's exactly what was said in 2007. Police have evidence that hasn't been made public.

It turned out not to be the case.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on November 04, 2013, 11:04:55 PM

Amaral knows nothing of the new investigation and the pj said they would only open if there was a good enough reason to
[ censored word]?.. Have no say in which way the case will go it doesn't matter what is said sy and the pj (new team ) know something

I agree sy know more than they letting on ... >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on November 04, 2013, 11:05:41 PM
I agree sy know more than they letting on ... >@@(*&)

I hope so, otherwise they have wasted an awful lot of taxpayers money...

N
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on November 04, 2013, 11:11:23 PM
I hope so, otherwise they have wasted an awful lot of taxpayers money...

N


im not interested in tax payers money ...just want madeleine found and the person/s brought to justice ...
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: sadie on November 04, 2013, 11:11:33 PM
That's exactly what was said in 2007. Police have evidence that hasn't been made public.

It turned out not to be the case.
Exactly.  They didn't release all the files.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on November 04, 2013, 11:16:33 PM
Exactly.  They didn't release all the files.

Do we know how many files were not released and why?

N
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on November 04, 2013, 11:19:16 PM

im not interested in tax payers money ...just want madeleine found and the person/s brought to justice ...

We would all like to see that, but you can bet that SY will have to justify their spend at some point and if they can't where might that leave future missing child investigations?

N
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benita on November 04, 2013, 11:23:59 PM
We would all like to see that, but you can bet that SY will have to justify their spend at some point and if they can't where might that leave future missing child investigations?

N


I have every confidence that sy will come up trumps ...if im wrong then i'll hold my hands up and say I was wrong ...
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on November 04, 2013, 11:25:26 PM
Do we know how many files were not released and why?

N

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MISSING_PAGES.htm
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on November 05, 2013, 07:09:09 AM
Now if the Mccanns have suppressed evidence for 5 years, since the e-fits were made, could this be potentially viewed as perverting the course of justice ?



Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on November 05, 2013, 07:34:48 AM
not sure Stephen ... maybe you should ask your solicitor(psychiatrist)

Ah the abuse starts again.

Typical mccann supporter behaviour.

Now who needs a psychiatrist ? @)(++(*

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 05, 2013, 07:38:40 AM
Ah the abuse starts again.

Typical mccann supporter behaviour.

Now who needs a psychiatrist ? @)(++(*

I think its a ridiculous question...but perhaps you can add it too the list of charges the MCcanns will eventually face..unless it was tractorman who done it
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on November 05, 2013, 07:40:54 AM
I think its a ridiculous question...but perhaps you can add it too the list of charges the MCcanns will eventually face..unless it was tractorman who done it

Why is it a ridiculous question ?

Do you think it is acceptable that the mccanns could have withheld vital evidence ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 07:45:42 AM
They were not allowed by law to investigate in Portugal ,the smith sighting efits were done while they should not have been ?? Martin smith must have been spoken to by he mccanns investigators while the case was open ??

Portuguese Laws apply only in Portugal. They cannot bind an English person interviewing an Irish person in Ireland.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 07:46:50 AM
Why is it a ridiculous question ?

Do you think it is acceptable that the mccanns could have withheld vital evidence ?

The 'vital evidence' being two facial e fits made by people who previously denied noting any facial features of the suspect?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 05, 2013, 07:48:50 AM
Why is it a ridiculous question ?

Do you think it is acceptable that the mccanns could have withheld vital evidence ?

 what evidence do you have that they withheld evidence
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on November 05, 2013, 08:39:46 AM
The 'vital evidence' being two facial e fits made by people who previously denied noting any facial features of the suspect?

One of whom according to the same Times article, has since stressed he no longer believes the man he saw was Gerry McCann.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on November 05, 2013, 08:50:06 AM
One of whom according to the same Times article, has since stressed he no longer believes the man he saw was Gerry McCann.

Is that from a statement of Mr. Smith ?

and unequivocal ?

or just another source ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on November 05, 2013, 09:26:19 AM
Is that from a statement of Mr. Smith ?

and unequivocal ?

or just another source ?

It's part of the very same Times article -  the content of which has been claimed as.. 'the troof'..  by some people.


 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on November 05, 2013, 09:28:07 AM
It's part of the very same Times article -  the content of which has been claimed as.. 'the troof'..  by some people.


 

So do you accept the Mccanns withheld vital evidence ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on November 05, 2013, 09:28:44 AM
what evidence do you have that they withheld evidence

The fact that the e-fits were not seen until 2013!

Morning, by the way.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on November 05, 2013, 09:33:57 AM
The fact that the e-fits were not seen until 2013!

Morning, by the way.

Plus that bundleman was discounted- yet they continued peddling him until Grange knocked it on the head. Perhaps not withholding evidence but curious way to behave if the search was sincere.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on November 05, 2013, 09:34:55 AM
So do you accept the Mccanns withheld vital evidence ?

Can we clear up my query first?    Do you believe it is true that (according to the Times article)  Mr. Smith has stressed that he no longer believes that GM was the person he saw?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on November 05, 2013, 09:36:39 AM
Can we clear up my query first?    Do you believe it is true that (according to the Times article)  Mr. Smith has stressed that he no longer believes that GM was the person he saw?


I believe they had good reasons to claim he did.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on November 05, 2013, 09:37:09 AM
Can we clear up my query first?    Do you believe it is true that (according to the Times article)  Mr. Smith has stressed that he no longer believes that GM was the person he saw?

I believe Clarence has said that Mr. Smith has stressed that he no longer believes that GM was the person he saw.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on November 05, 2013, 09:45:08 AM
now what would a superspy be doing getting caught shoplifting AND accepting police caution


Henri Exton

Published: 30 July 2010
In August 2009 we said that Mr Exton was guilty of shoplifting and that he was sacked as a result.

Although he was cautioned, we accept that the caution was rescinded. He was not sacked and continued to work until he decided to retire. We apologise for the error.


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/henri-exton-6497797.html
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Benice on November 05, 2013, 09:49:05 AM
I believe Clarence has said that Mr. Smith has stressed that he no longer believes that GM was the person he saw.

As that's news to me, may I ask when he made that statement plz?

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 10:14:43 AM
The fact that the e-fits were not seen until 2013!

Morning, by the way.

Seen by whom?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Carana on November 05, 2013, 10:58:06 AM
Interestingly, an e-fit of a potential suspect / person of interest in the Alps murder case was only released last night, even though the police had the description very early on in the investigation. From the outside, that might seem odd, however they had their reasons: they had hoped to quietly trace an uncommon type of motorbike helmet on their own.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 05, 2013, 11:12:14 AM
Seen by whom?

The public.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 11:26:15 AM
The public.

Does the public have the right to see all evidence, even that made immaterial by the non observance of the observers?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 05, 2013, 11:29:01 AM
Does the public have the right to see all evidence, even that made immaterial by the non observance of the observers?

"non observance of the observers"? What do you mean?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 12:09:54 PM
"non observance of the observers"? What do you mean?

The Smiths previously denied seeing his face.

My view is that the e-fits are suspected to be useless given their provenance, but TV being a visual medium, needs visual hooks. The presence of visual hooks probably increases the total response rate. E fits anyway are known to be very unreliable.

Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 05, 2013, 12:21:12 PM
The Smiths previously denied seeing his face.

My view is that the e-fits are suspected to be useless given their provenance, but TV being a visual medium, needs visual hooks. The presence of visual hooks probably increases the total response rate. E fits anyway are known to be very unreliable.

I think you may be right. The papers appear to have already lost interest in them, which supports your theory.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: colombosstogey on November 05, 2013, 12:33:11 PM
I think you may be right. The papers appear to have already lost interest in them, which supports your theory.

They now have to find away to discount the Smith sighting again, so they can match the Heroin drug abusing, theif who steals blonde children from their beds and sells them for 5 Euros....

The E fit hardly matches a tall 6ft 2in tall black African does it.

The thing is too i knew about the smith sighting and the liking to McCanns way back in 2007/2008 so did loads of other people. It then just DISAPPEARED, so i assumed it had been CARTER RUCKED.

It was out there and talked about a lot at one time.....makes sense to me that the sighting was carter rucked ......
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 05, 2013, 12:43:17 PM
They now have to find away to discount the Smith sighting again, so they can match the Heroin drug abusing, theif who steals blonde children from their beds and sells them for 5 Euros....

The E fit hardly matches a tall 6ft 2in tall black African does it.

The thing is too i knew about the smith sighting and the liking to McCanns way back in 2007/2008 so did loads of other people. It then just DISAPPEARED, so i assumed it had been CARTER RUCKED.

It was out there and talked about a lot at one time.....makes sense to me that the sighting was carter rucked ......

It never disappeared, it just wasn't mentioned much. But it is mentioned in K McCann's book, and was mentioned in the 2009 Cutting Edge. But the newspapers barely ever mentioned it, or the McCanns in interviews, that's true.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 12:44:17 PM
Is that your personal opinion or has there been research conducted to back that up ?

There is considerable research on face recognition and impressions. All of it shows that we are very good at face recognition given repeated exposure, but very poor when it is only in passing. Artist's impressions, photo fits and edits are often at wide variance from the original.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: jassi on November 05, 2013, 12:48:55 PM
There is considerable research on face recognition and impressions. All of it shows that we are very good at face recognition given repeated exposure, but very poor when it is only in passing. Artist's impressions, photo fits and edits are often at wide variance from the original.

If this is the case, one has to wonder why police seem to put so much faith in them.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 12:49:05 PM
They now have to find away to discount the Smith sighting again, so they can match the Heroin drug abusing, theif who steals blonde children from their beds and sells them for 5 Euros....

The E fit hardly matches a tall 6ft 2in tall black African does it.

The thing is too i knew about the smith sighting and the liking to McCanns way back in 2007/2008 so did loads of other people. It then just DISAPPEARED, so i assumed it had been CARTER RUCKED.

It was out there and talked about a lot at one time.....makes sense to me that the sighting was carter rucked ......

What you and others are doing is trying to force modern police investigations into a TV like narrative. Old fashioned methods like Amaral's involve being suspect based- choosing a likely candidate and gathering evidence to prove your guesswork. Modern methods involve considering many lines of enquiry and testing all of them against reality. It is not surprising that various possibilities conflict.

You will note that older methods are much more likely to end up with false convictions or failed prosecutions, because becoming telescopes on one set of facts may blond you to the truth.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 12:49:56 PM
If this is the case, one has to wonder why police seem to put so much faith in them.

Window dressing. And getting the response rate up.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: colombosstogey on November 05, 2013, 02:30:20 PM
What you and others are doing is trying to force modern police investigations into a TV like narrative. Old fashioned methods like Amaral's involve being suspect based- choosing a likely candidate and gathering evidence to prove your guesswork. Modern methods involve considering many lines of enquiry and testing all of them against reality. It is not surprising that various possibilities conflict.

You will note that older methods are much more likely to end up with false convictions or failed prosecutions, because becoming telescopes on one set of facts may blond you to the truth.

My dear Aiofe, it has NOTHING to do with finding Madeliene it is all about making money for the media.....

From a tiny acorn the story of this guy has grown into a huge oak tree. The PJ simply wanted to ascertain where he was on the night of the 3rd as his mobile phone pinged in the area.

The same with Paul Robinson.

Now with the first guy it turned out he had a record, was black and and dead. What a great patsy......

He cannot deny anything.

Paul Robinson can.

It has NOTHING TO DO WITH DETECTIVE work not one bit. What detective work really?

It is the MEDIA who is running the Madelienie McCann case. Every opportunity they get they use something and run with it and make loads of money EVEN LYING about the poor guy and ruining his reputation and his familys life but who cares he is dead the dead cant sue anyone......

The mystery of the little girl will always be a mystery as no one is really looking for her, and no one is doing any detective work.

We get shown an Efit on crimewatch which we all knew about well sorry the ones who have been following the case.

The Efit has gotten no one anywhere, as it looks far too much like Gerry McCann.

So now they have to find another patsy to pin it on.

A dead guy flattened by a tractor who went from being a petty thief and taking drugs when he was young and pardoned in 1996, to a murdering heroin crazed addict who stole a child and sold her for 5 euros.

Whilst people are concentrating on this CARP the real villians are getting away with it....

This is from Private Eye and it says it all really. This guy also has had trail by media not a judge.

http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t140/MrsAristotle/privat10_zps7e3034f7.jpg (http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t140/MrsAristotle/privat10_zps7e3034f7.jpg)

Respectfully colombostogey...
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: faithlilly on November 05, 2013, 02:54:43 PM
With regard to the Crimewatch debacle :

http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourbeeb/david-elstein/crimewatch-dupers-or-duped
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 03:31:47 PM

"E fits anyway are known to be very unreliable."

I didn't ask you that, I asked if the above quote is your personal opinion or if is a researched fact !
Essex police in particular seem to have a lot of faith in their use - http://www.essex.police.uk/news_features/features_archive/2013/march/efits.aspx (I thought I had better include a citation for that claim given your constant badgering of Anne to provide "cites")


So a potentially biased source (of course police believe police methods) without any design or control claims that half of edits are not useful. Psychological experiments, well designed and neutral, show that face recall is extremely poor unless exposure is repeated and amplified.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 03:35:29 PM
So the Crimewatch programme (or a fair proportion of it) was an exercise in 'window dressing in order to get the response rate up' ?

It is a wide trawl for information. Many crimewatch results are collateral rather than direct.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: jassi on November 05, 2013, 03:45:00 PM
And those statistics are available where precisely or is it once again a personal opinion paraded as fact ?
[/b]

There seems to be a lot of that on here - in my personal opinion, of course.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 03:51:30 PM
And those statistics are available where precisely or is it once again a personal opinion paraded as fact ?
Listen to the follow ups. It is often the background evidence that has the greatest effect.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 05, 2013, 03:52:46 PM
[/b]

There seems to be a lot of that on here - in my personal opinion, of course.

It is undeniable that much of the information offered to crimewatch is collateral rather than direct.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on November 05, 2013, 03:59:07 PM
Now if the Mccanns have suppressed evidence for 5 years, since the e-fits were made, could this be potentially viewed as perverting the course of justice ?

I believe that the police would examine the source, the accuracy, whether there is any proof or evidence etc and then make a decision.

As it has not been announced that the Mccanns have been cautioned or charged with the offence that you suggest, I believe the answer to your question is NO.


Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: BigFatBlonde on November 05, 2013, 04:00:52 PM
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MISSING_PAGES.htm

thanks Red  8((()*/
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: sadie on November 05, 2013, 04:07:18 PM
What you and others are doing is trying to force modern police investigations into a TV like narrative. Old fashioned methods like Amaral's involve being suspect based- choosing a likely candidate and gathering evidence to prove your guesswork. Modern methods involve considering many lines of enquiry and testing all of them against reality. It is not surprising that various possibilities conflict.

You will note that older methods are much more likely to end up with false convictions or failed prosecutions, because becoming telescopes on one set of facts may blond you to the truth.
8@??)(

Very well put, Aiofe. 

The old EMU type, bury-your-head-in-the-sand thing, goes perfectly with a Fascist State.  This includes if you dont want to believe the facts, then ignore them .... examples of this are seen every day on here.   Where one settles before the facts are established, far too early, on the main suspect and only works to condemn that man.   Amaral did just that

Modern Democratic Methods should look at every angle and keep all options open, ever ready to adjust , change thoughts, as new evidence / facts emerge.  And only when a complete picture emerges, via unbiased means ..... act.


The first is a closed minded, bullying approach = Fascist
The second is an open minded fair approach = Democratic


Portugal has to decide whether despite it calling itself a Democracy, it truly wants to be that .... or whether it is content to remain a Fascist Police State.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on November 05, 2013, 04:15:03 PM
8@??)(

Very well put, Aiofe. 

The old EMU type, bury-your-head-in-the-sand thing, goes perfectly with a Fascist State.  This includes if you dont want to believe the facts, then ignore them .... examples of this are seen every day on here.   Where one settles before the facts are established, far too early, on the main suspect and only works to condemn that man.   Amaral did just that

Modern Democratic Methods should look at every angle and keep all options open, ever ready to adjust , change thoughts, as new evidence / facts emerge.  And only when a complete picture emerges, via unbiased means ..... act.


The first is a closed minded, bullying approach = Fascist
The second is an open minded fair approach = Democratic


Portugal has to decide whether despite it calling itself a Democracy, it truly wants to be that .... or whether it is content to remain a Fascist Police State.

Xenophobic behaviour is apparent again in this post

In an open system, all logical considerations should be open to the investigation, and in the SY review it clearly isn't.

So what does that make the UK in your post ?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 05, 2013, 04:15:08 PM
8@??)(

Very well put, Aiofe. 

The old EMU type, bury-your-head-in-the-sand thing, goes perfectly with a Fascist State.  This includes if you dont want to believe the facts, then ignore them .... examples of this are seen every day on here.   Where one settles before the facts are established, far too early, on the main suspect and only works to condemn that man.   Amaral did just that

Modern Democratic Methods should look at every angle and keep all options open, ever ready to adjust , change thoughts, as new evidence / facts emerge.  And only when a complete picture emerges, via unbiased means ..... act.


The first is a closed minded, bullying approach = Fascist
The second is an open minded fair approach = Democratic


Portugal has to decide whether despite it calling itself a Democracy, it truly wants to be that .... or whether it is content to remain a Fascist Police State.

Write them a letter with your ultimatum Sadie 8((()*/
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 05, 2013, 04:18:23 PM
Xenophobic behaviour is apparent again in this post

In an open system, all logical considerations should be open to the investigation, and in the SY review it clearly isn't.

So what does that make the UK in your post ?

Sadie's making her bid for this years Tony Parsons Award @)(++(*
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 05, 2013, 04:22:07 PM
Xenophobic behaviour is apparent again in this post

In an open system, all logical considerations should be open to the investigation, and in the SY review it clearly isn't.

So what does that make the UK in your post ?

 SY are probably one of the best police forces in the world...you just cant accept that after looking at the evidence they don't consider the McCanns suspects
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on November 05, 2013, 04:24:50 PM
Xenophobic behaviour is apparent again in this post

In an open system, all logical considerations should be open to the investigation, and in the SY review it clearly isn't.

So what does that make the UK in your post ?

"In an open system, all logical considerations should be open to the investigation, and in the SY review it clearly isn't."

where is your evidence that they have NOT looked at all logical considerations?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 05, 2013, 04:25:07 PM
SY are probably one of the best police forces in the world...you just cant accept that after looking at the evidence they don't consider the McCanns suspects

That's your opinion, and good luck to you and the others who hold it, but nothing excuses xenophobic attacks on other countries.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: sadie on November 05, 2013, 04:27:50 PM
Xenophobic behaviour is apparent again in this post

In an open system, all logical considerations should be open to the investigation, and in the SY review it clearly isn't.

So what does that make the UK in your post ?
How about if SY have worked through them all?  Have considerd in depth all logical considerations.  Are they just tidying up the few little stray bits to confirm their findings?   

Are the conclusions of all that work, the reason that the PJ has decided to re-open the case?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 05, 2013, 04:31:23 PM
I quite agree with you davel that SY are one of the most respected police forces on an international level and if as DCI Redwood has stated that Kate & Gerry are not suspects then it is of little consequence to SY what I, you or anybody else accepts.

Wrong. If you accept the word of the police without seeing the evidence then it is you and Sadie who live in the police state, not the Portuguese.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: imustpointout on November 05, 2013, 04:34:07 PM
stephen's point is so important that I started a new thread:

all logical considerations should be open to the investigation (Awaiting Approval)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 05, 2013, 04:40:51 PM
Hi Lyall, I haven't said that I have or have not accepted the word of SY ! I merely stated that it is of little consequence to SY what I, you or anybody else accepts, this is their show and they'll run it as they see fit.
And from my experiences when visiting Portugal many times it is far from a police state.

Fair enough Pat. I agree SY couldn't care less what we think. But we do ?{)(**
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: ferryman on November 05, 2013, 06:36:14 PM
I think it's pretty much established.

Nothing was "suppressed". 

But the right opportunity for a useful efit to be released has not occurred until now.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on November 05, 2013, 06:38:19 PM
I think it's pretty much established.

Nothing was "suppressed". 

But the right opportunity for a useful efit to be released has not occurred until now.

You must have a separate news source to me then! Can you supply links please?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 05, 2013, 06:39:02 PM
I think it's pretty much established.

Nothing was "suppressed". 

But the right opportunity for a useful efit to be released has not occurred until now.

That's one way of putting it.

The "right opportunity" being the exact moment the 9.15 sighting can't be used any longer?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on November 06, 2013, 08:01:21 PM
The Smiths previously denied seeing his face.

My view is that the e-fits are suspected to be useless given their provenance, but TV being a visual medium, needs visual hooks. The presence of visual hooks probably increases the total response rate. E fits anyway are known to be very unreliable.

Lie......please represent the facts...because you cant back up that lie, ta and there was me thinking you  were such a strickler for facts
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Aiofe on November 07, 2013, 04:47:09 AM
Lie......please represent the facts...because you cant back up that lie, ta and there was me thinking you  were such a strickler for facts

Mr Smith:

Regarding the description of the individual who carried the child he states that: he was Caucasian, around 175 to 180m in height. He appeared to be about 35/40 years old. He had an average build, a bit on the thin side. His hair was short, in a basic male cut, brown in colour. He cannot state if it was dark or lighter in tone. He did not wear glasses and had no beard or moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details partly due to the fact that the lighting was not very good.

Mrs Smith:

the individual was male, Caucasian, light-skinned, between 20/30 years of age, of normal physical build, around 1,70/1,75 metres in height. At the time she saw his face but now cannot remember it. She thinks that he had a clean-shaven face. She does not remember seeing tattoos, scars or earrings. She did not notice his ears. His hair was thick-ish, light brown in colour, short at the back (normal) and a bit longer on the top.

So, neither gathered any information about the face of the man- he could have had a beard or moustache or glasses even. There is no memory of chin shape, eye shape, nose shape, cheekbones, scars, etc. They may have glanced at the face but they did not see enough to add any detail to their description.

Yet months later they provided an e-fit.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: jassi on November 07, 2013, 08:26:46 AM
Mr Smith:

Regarding the description of the individual who carried the child he states that: he was Caucasian, around 175 to 180m in height. He appeared to be about 35/40 years old. He had an average build, a bit on the thin side. His hair was short, in a basic male cut, brown in colour. He cannot state if it was dark or lighter in tone. He did not wear glasses and had no beard or moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details partly due to the fact that the lighting was not very good.

Mrs Smith:

the individual was male, Caucasian, light-skinned, between 20/30 years of age, of normal physical build, around 1,70/1,75 metres in height. At the time she saw his face but now cannot remember it. She thinks that he had a clean-shaven face. She does not remember seeing tattoos, scars or earrings. She did not notice his ears. His hair was thick-ish, light brown in colour, short at the back (normal) and a bit longer on the top.

So, neither gathered any information about the face of the man- he could have had a beard or moustache or glasses even. There is no memory of chin shape, eye shape, nose shape, cheekbones, scars, etc. They may have glanced at the face but they did not see enough to add any detail to their description.

Yet months later they provided an e-fit.


 You appear to have just contradicted what you wrote in the first paragraph
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lace on November 07, 2013, 09:48:31 AM
The PJ did nothing with the e fit,   Mr Smith said he was 60/80% sure it was Gerry,  the PJ said Gerry was in the Tapas Bar at the time the Smiths saw the man and so dismissed the e.vit.

Could the McCann's have released the e.vit?    I don't think so.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 07, 2013, 10:06:44 AM
Mrs Smith never stated, neither for the Gardai nor for the PJ.
There's no evidence that, when the alarm was raised, the Smith family wasn't yet at the Kelly's.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: jassi on November 07, 2013, 10:10:39 AM


They both admit that they noticed nothing of note about the man's face; so how did they later provide details for the e-fits?

On the contrary, according to your post, Mr Smith says that the man was NOT wearing glasses, or beard or moustache. That seems fairly definite to me in as far as it goes.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 14, 2013, 10:33:46 PM
Not sure if it is significant but this article has now been removed
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 14, 2013, 10:38:00 PM
It seem odd that all the other articles are still there but this one has gone
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 14, 2013, 11:03:04 PM
Which article Davel?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Apostate on November 15, 2013, 08:11:50 AM
this one?

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article3906190.ece
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Cariad on November 15, 2013, 08:29:53 AM
this one?

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article3906190.ece

I'm confused.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Luz on November 15, 2013, 12:13:42 PM
It seem odd that all the other articles are still there but this one has gone

Carter Rucked, obviously!


It's good that they printed it in paper: it's here to stay.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on November 15, 2013, 12:15:34 PM
this one?

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/crime/article3906190.ece

No its not that one..thats the one by dominic kennedy...the original one was by the insight reporters...just wondering why it is now no longer available
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on November 15, 2013, 02:59:54 PM
Does it matter?

No!

Worlds seen it...So what was in the  original Times article  that wasnt  inthe Kennedy version? Both articles are on this thread infull, perhaps you want to do a comparison.....do shout if you need help locating them.....

Also why do you think it has apparently gone awol.....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on November 15, 2013, 03:09:50 PM
The Telegraph, Star and Mail articles are also still there.

(At the moment....)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: faithlilly on November 16, 2013, 02:47:50 PM
Oh the irony !!

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-and-gerry-mccanns-outrage-at-police-324218#ixzz2kobtOfCd
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Angelo222 on December 14, 2013, 10:21:28 PM
Oh the irony !!

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-and-gerry-mccanns-outrage-at-police-324218#ixzz2kobtOfCd

And they have the audacity to blame Amaral for damaging the search.  Oh my!!
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Wonderfulspam on December 29, 2013, 02:39:37 PM
The Sunday Times

Kate and Gerry McCann and Madeleine's Fund

Published: 28 December 2013

In articles dated October 23 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/regulars/corrections/article1357081.ece


So what I would like to know is, where did channel 4 get their information from prior to the Sunday Times article being printed?

Simon Israel:

" These are 2 e-fits of the same man. A man who may hold the key to Madeleine McCanns disappearance.
They've been shut away in a private investigation file for 5 years.
They were compiled from 2 witness accounts on the night Madeleine disappeared, but never handed over to the Portuguese investigation. Now British police are treating them with the utmost importance"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5w21mREDqtI
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Lyall on December 29, 2013, 02:47:43 PM
Well that certainly clears that matter up.

Not. October 2009? >@@(*&) Why is there never any urgency?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: AnneGuedes on December 29, 2013, 02:48:20 PM

Published: 28 December 2013
...
In articles dated October 23
Amazing reactivity !
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Mr Moderator on December 29, 2013, 03:57:32 PM
Readers should note that this article was pulled by the Sunday Times shortly after going to press and was replaced by a somewhat watered down version in The Times the following day.

On Sunday 29 December the Sunday Times printed a retraction and an apology for suggesting that the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years. They now claim that the e-fits were passed to police as early as October 2009 which is still over two years after they were created by Kevin Halligen and Oakley International.

www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/regulars/corrections/article1357081.ece





Sunday Times - paper edition 27 October 2013

Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years

(http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/multimedia/dynamic/00380/STN2704PIC3_380277k.jpg)

             Madeleine disappeared from her parents holiday apartment in the
                       Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz on 3rd May 2007



THE critical new evidence at the centre of Scotland Yard’s search for Madeleine McCann was kept secret for five years after it was presented to her parents by ex-MI5 investigators.

The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008.

It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard.

But the trail was left to go cold for five years because the McCanns and their advisers sidelined the report and threatened to sue its authors if they divulged the contents.

The report, seen by the Sunday Times, called for the E-Fits to be released immediately and said "anomalies" in statements by the McCanns and their friends must be resolved.

A source close to the McCanns said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if made public.

[Page 4]

The new prime suspect was first singled out by detectives in 2008. Their findings were suppressed. Insight reports

The team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by Kate and Gerry McCann to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine.

It was the spring of 2008, 10 months after the three-year-old had disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz, and the McCanns were beginning to despair over the handling of the local police investigation. They were relying on the new team to bring fresh hope.

But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public.

Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy.

They found that it contained new evidence about a key suspect seen carrying a child away from the McCanns’ holiday apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared.

This sighting is now considered the main lead in the investigation and E-Fits of the suspect, taken from the report, were the centrepiece of a Crimewatch appeal that attracted more than 2,400 calls from the public this month.

One of the investigators whose work was sidelined said last week he was “utterly stunned” when he watched the programme and saw the evidence his team had passed to the McCanns five years ago presented as a breakthrough.

The team of investigators from the security firm Oakley International were hired by the McCanns’ Find Madeleine fund, which bankrolled private investigations into the girl’s disappearance. They were led by Henri Exton, MI5’s former undercover operations chief.

Their report, seen by The Sunday Times, focused on a sighting by an Irish family of a man carrying a child at about 10pm on May 3, 2007, when Madeleine went missing.

An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns’ friends was dismissed as less credible after “serious inconsistencies” were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about “anomalies” in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends.

Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”

He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund. A source close to the fund said the report was considered “hypercritical of the people involved” and “would have been completely distracting” if it became public.

Oakley’s six-month investigation included placing undercover agents inside the Ocean Club where the family stayed, lie detector tests, covert surveillance and a forensic re-examination of all existing evidence.

It was immediately clear that two sightings of vital importance had been reported to the police. Two men were seen carrying children near the apartments between 9pm, when Madeleine was last seen by Gerry, and 10pm, when Kate discovered her missing.

The first man was seen at 9.15pm by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns, who had been dining with them at the tapas bar in the resort. She saw a man carrying a girl just yards from the apartment as she went to check on her children.

The second sighting was by Martin Smith and his family from Ireland, who saw a man carrying a child near the apartment just before 10pm.

The earlier Tanner sighting had always been treated as the most significant, but the Oakley team controversially poured cold water on her account.

Instead, they focused on the Smith sighting, travelling to Ireland to interview the family and produce E-Fits of the man they saw. Their report said the Smiths were “helpful and sincere” and concluded: “The Smith sighting is credible evidence of a sighting of Maddie and more credible than Jane Tanner’s sighting”. The evidence had been “neglected for too long” and an “overemphasis placed on Tanner”.

The new focus shifted the believed timeline of the abduction back by 45 minutes. The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised timeline should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.


"The report questioned 'anomalies' in the McCanns' statements"


The potential abductor seen by the Smiths is now the prime suspect in Scotland Yard’s investigation, after detectives established that the man seen earlier by Tanner was almost certainly a father carrying his child home from a nearby night creche. The Smith E-Fits were the centrepiece of the Crimewatch appeal.

Investigators had E-Fits five years ago

One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme . . . It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things . . . And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said.

The detailed images of the face of the man seen by the Smith family were never released by the McCanns. But an artist’s impression of the man seen earlier by Tanner was widely promoted, even though the face had to be left blank because she had only seen him fleetingly and from a distance.

Various others images of lone men spotted hanging around the resort at other times were also released.

Nor were the Smith E-Fits included in Kate McCann’s 2011 book, Madeleine, which contained a whole section on eight “key sightings” and identified those of the Smiths and Tanner as most “crucial”. Descriptions of all seven other sightings were accompanied by an E-Fit or artist’s impression. The Smiths’ were the only exception. So why was such a “crucial” piece of evidence kept under lock and key?

The relationship between the fund and Oakley was already souring by the time the report was submitted — and its findings could only have made matters worse.

As well as questioning parts of the McCanns’ evidence, it contained sensitive information about Madeleine’s sleeping patterns and raised the highly sensitive possibility that she could have died in an accident after leaving the apartment herself from one of two unsecured doors.

There was also an uncomfortable complication with Smith’s account. He had originally told the police that he had “recognised something” about the way Gerry McCann carried one of his children which reminded him of the man he had seen in Praia da Luz.

Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.

The McCanns were also understandably wary of Oakley after allegations that the chairman, Kevin Halligen, failed to pass on money paid by the fund to Exton’s team. Halligen denies this. He was later convicted of fraud in an unrelated case in the US.

The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.

He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.

“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.

A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.

It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”

Insight: Heidi Blake and Jonathan Calvert


http://www.mccannfiles.com/id285.html
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on December 29, 2013, 04:19:02 PM
Whatever the truth is about who had them and when, and truth be told no one really knows, fact remains the mccanns did nothing with these important efits of a man seen on the actual night with a blonde 4 yr old or so child in pyjamas......not a pip squeak out of them since they were in their possession in late 2008...not in any interview on TV, not in KMs book, under key suspects...nowhere..... In fact they went on to make their documentary Madeleine Was Here months later in spring 2009 and promoted the idea in that that Tannerman was the same person as Smithman! He must have stopped off for a haircut in that 45 minutes!

And why did it take the Mccanns a year to hand them over to PJ and LP as alledged? No urgency again.

And so they were handed over to SY in August 2011? 3/4 months after they began their review....that sense of urgency again! But no, the Times told us SY could not get them from Oakley International before them getting written permission off the Mccanns....why the need for this if they were handed over to PJ and LP...SY had all their files from 2011...I also wonder why it took two years for SY to release these efits? What a dogs dinner.
Fact remains Mccanns and their investigators did withhold these efits from the public, the public who they asked for info on the most untenable of other "suspects" and not the elephant in the room one!!!

 >@@(*&)
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on December 29, 2013, 06:45:31 PM
What this thread shows me is how gullible the anti McCann posters are. you see an article that criticises the McCanns and you are happy to believe every word. As I have said before This is why your conclusions are so way off the mark. It really indicates a lack of intelligence. I don't have time now but later will show where the holes are in this article. I will give you one pointer....why did the relationship with the McCanns and the investigators fail....could it have anything to do with the antics of Halligan...the convicted fraudster


 I have been criticised all through this thread for stating that the article would be challenged with possible legal action...looks like I have been proved right
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on December 29, 2013, 06:51:47 PM
says it all if one bows down to legal action versus any TRUTH....shudder.......My post 1012 stands lol...nite davel....

 8**8:/:
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Eleanor on December 30, 2013, 05:48:56 AM
says it all if one bows down to legal action versus any TRUTH....shudder.......My post 1012 stands lol...nite davel....

 8**8:/:

So who exactly are you accusing of lying?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on December 30, 2013, 09:29:21 AM
says it all if one bows down to legal action versus any TRUTH....shudder.......My post 1012 stands lol...nite davel....

 8**8:/:

You have got it back to front...legal action prevents lies........the TRUTH is sacred and untouchable by libel laws...you need to get your facts right
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on December 30, 2013, 09:45:20 AM
You have got it back to front...legal action prevents lies........the TRUTH is sacred and untouchable by libel laws...you need to get your facts right

How naive.

Legal action or the threat of legal action is also used to cover the truth.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on December 30, 2013, 09:48:19 AM
How naive.

Legal action or the threat of legal action is also used to cover the truth.

 you are wrong...if the times can show the article is true then they do not have to fear legal action
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Victoria on December 30, 2013, 09:49:59 AM

 I have been criticised all through this thread for stating that the article would be challenged with possible legal action...looks like I have been proved right

Quite right, davel. Not that anyone here will learn anything from this sorry episode.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on December 30, 2013, 09:52:45 AM
you are wrong...if the times can show the article is true then they do not have to fear legal action

I wasn't just referring to this case.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on December 30, 2013, 09:53:53 AM
I wasn't just referring to this case.

 Then you are off topic
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: stephen25000 on December 30, 2013, 10:03:21 AM
Then you are off topic

Read my words again, and then you might comprehend.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: slartibartfast on December 30, 2013, 10:04:51 AM
How naive.

Legal action or the threat of legal action is also used to cover the truth.

Agreed, legal action in some cases is like a game of poker, the ante is upped until one side folds. It doesn't necessarily follow that they had the weaker hand.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on December 30, 2013, 01:42:10 PM
Agreed, legal action in some cases is like a game of poker, the ante is upped until one side folds. It doesn't necessarily follow that they had the weaker hand.

And sometimes people take legal action and some even win when they lied all along....

Lance Armstrong, Jeffrey Archer, Jonathan Aitken, Tommy Sheridan?etc etc...thus it is not a fact that anyne who takes legal action must be right....
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on December 30, 2013, 01:47:29 PM
Agreed, legal action in some cases is like a game of poker, the ante is upped until one side folds. It doesn't necessarily follow that they had the weaker hand.

 Or..as the two journalist who wrote the story had recently lost a case and a large sum of money for the times, the times realised it was on a loser. The fact is that posters on here are wise after the event whereas I was wise before it
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: pegasus on December 31, 2013, 12:16:12 AM
{snip) ... appears to have known far too much about The McCann Affair for someone who was supposedly uninvolved in the latter ... (snip)
What exactly do you mean by this please?
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Eleanor on December 31, 2013, 12:43:24 AM
What exactly do you mean by this please?

Cristovao wrote a book,  entitled The Star of Madeleine, but in Portuguese, of course.  From whence came the myth of six dead bodies.  And a few other things that he didn't ought to have known about and probably made up anyway, since he wasn't actually involved in the case, having already been sacked by The PJ at some time previously.

Is there anything else I can tell you?

Sheesh.  I worry when no one seems to know anything much at all.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Redblossom on December 31, 2013, 04:11:57 PM
And if anyne wants to read the star of madeleine here is a precis......perhaps eleanor can prove that cristovao made up the story of the dead bodies


http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1581.0

Of course one can claim everythng n the book was MADE UP.......

but without back up its just accusations......

as are the ludicrous accusations that he and amaral abducted kids to write books and make money...desperados
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on January 01, 2014, 10:28:20 PM
I think its a waste of time trying to get you to understand a simple principle...there is no evidence ...requires no evidence to support it...it is up to you to supply evidence of suppression...
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: pegasus on January 01, 2014, 10:33:09 PM
If Mr Amaral had not been forced out on 2nd Oct 2007, the Irish family would have been flown back to Portugal and done efits by 10th Oct 2007 latest IMO.


Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: John on January 01, 2014, 10:49:24 PM
If Mr Amaral had not been forced out on 2nd Oct 2007, the Irish family would have been flown back to Portugal and done efits by 10th Oct 2007 latest IMO.

I agree that would most probably have happened but in any event Kevin Halligen of Oakley International got them done after he was contracted in March 2008.  We know from Mr Smiths own statement to the Irish Garda that he refused to participate in the creation of e-fits for B Kennedy for some reason.

If the recent report from the Sunday Times is to be believed, it was well over a year before they were offered to both LC and the PJ.  The question will always be WHY?

The McCanns have done untold damage to their credibility by refusing to publicly clear up this matter once and for all. A simple statement was all that was required.  The promise of total openness and transparency appears to be long gone!



Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: pegasus on January 01, 2014, 11:27:12 PM
Well, there is always Paiva and his truncheon.  And then there's The PJ Officer convicted of falsifying evidence, whose name I can never remember.  And I could come up with a couple more if I could be bothered to put my mind to it.

But I don't think that I have actually accused anyone directly.  Just very worried by what was going on in Portimao in a supposed democracy where it was never a good idea to go upstairs.
Well someone else was ludicrously accusing Amaral and Cristavao of doing it to make money from books. Voila!. Where will this stop? Is someone going to suggest Mr Amaral broke into the BBC and manipulated Crimewatch at 18.30?
Mr Amaral was about to bring the Irish witnesses back at the beginning of Oct 2007,but throwing him off the case prevented that, otherwise PJ would have had efits that week IMO. 
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Angelo222 on January 02, 2014, 01:20:49 AM
It seems that Madeline's disappearance has helped to fill a few coffers in both camps not to mention the other various hangers on who have profited from her disappearance.  Never has a little girl been so marketable in such terrible circumstances.  Personally I find the whole thing rather distasteful and the longer it goes on the worse it seems to get.

The suggestion that Amaral or Christavao were in some way involved is so bizarre as to not even warrant a response.
Title: Re: Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.
Post by: Davel on January 02, 2014, 06:22:33 PM
I agree that would most probably have happened but in any event Kevin Halligen of Oakley International got them done after he was contracted in March 2008.  We know from Mr Smiths own statement to the Irish Garda that he refused to participate in the creation of e-fits for B Kennedy for some reason.

If the recent report from the Sunday Ti