Are there other cases of an abductor carrying a child through streets?

[pegasus]

The only indisputable facts are the Smiths paid for a meal at 2127hrs on the 3rd & some of them got on a plane back to Eire on the 4th. Anything else is as open to questioning as all the other witness statements regarding that night,

It is obvious the Smith sighting did happen.
Two of the reasons I think it was an innocent dad with his daughter are:
(1) I looked at other cases of abduction (and of hiding bods), and not surprisingly found that open carrying in arm along populated town centre streets never happens.
(2) Even the stupidest perp would not openly carry in arms because the idea is to conceal what you are transporting.

[misty]

It is obvious the Smith sighting did happen.
Two of the reasons I think it was an innocent dad with his daughter are:
(1) I looked at other cases of abduction (and of hiding bods), and not surprisingly found that open carrying in arm along populated town centre streets never happens.
(2) Even the stupidest perp would not openly carry in arms because the idea is to conceal what you are transporting.

Why is it obvious it happened? Why did it specfically have to not be Robert Murat?

[pegasus]

Why is it obvious it happened? Why did it specfically have to not be Robert Murat?

If you are saying it happened but on a different evening, see Dolphin card transaction on Thursday night (the link I have if you want). Or if you are saying the witnesses never saw nothing, then all I can say is why would 4 people invent such a thing. You can read the statements of MS AS PS (and indirectly of TS). Why did young witness TS say he saw a man wearing a black jacket carrying a girl with bare feet? Are you saying he invented it? Or are you saying he saw it but on a different night?

[pathfinder73]

Why is it obvious it happened? Why did it specfically have to not be Robert Murat?

"Adds that in May and August of 2006, he saw ROBERT MURAT in Praia da Luz bars. On one of these occasions, the first, he was inebriated and spoke to everyone. He did not wear glasses at that time. He also states that the individual who carried the child was not ROBERT. He would have recognised him immediately." (Martin Smith)

[Brietta]

If you are saying it happened but on a different evening, see Dolphin card transaction on Thursday night (the link I have if you want). Or if you are saying the witnesses never saw nothing, then all I can say is why would 4 people invent such a thing. You can read the statements of MS AS PS (and indirectly of TS). Why did young witness TS say he saw a man wearing a black jacket carrying a girl with bare feet? Are you saying he invented it? Or are you saying he saw it but on a different night?

The TS statement is hearsay ... and there is no independent witness to the drinking in Kelly's bar ... there is no independent witness to their journey home ... and thanks to the scrubbed CCTV there is no record of when they arrived nor an independent witness to their arrival.

[misty]

If you are saying it happened but on a different evening, see Dolphin card transaction on Thursday night (the link I have if you want). Or if you are saying the witnesses never saw nothing, then all I can say is why would 4 people invent such a thing. You can read the statements of MS AS PS (and indirectly of TS). Why did young witness TS say he saw a man wearing a black jacket carrying a girl with bare feet? Are you saying he invented it? Or are you saying he saw it but on a different night?

I am not saying that the witnesses were the ones who invented the story.

[slartibartfast]

The TS statement is hearsay ... and there is no independent witness to the drinking in Kelly's bar ... there is no independent witness to their journey home ... and thanks to the scrubbed CCTV there is no record of when they arrived nor an independent witness to their arrival.

Why are they not considered independent witnesses?

[Brietta]

Why are they not considered independent witnesses?

Let me get this right.

Everything uttered by Madeline's parents and their friends is questionable.

Everything stated by anyone else is accepted without question or corroboration.

Sounds par for the course.

[slartibartfast]

Let me get this right.

Everything uttered by Madeline's parents and their friends is questionable.

Everything stated by anyone else is accepted without question or corroboration.

Sounds par for the course.

That's an interesting leap of logic? I asked why the Smiths were not seen as independent witnesses and you came up with that. Do you understand what independent means?

[pegasus]

The TS statement is hearsay ... and there is no independent witness to the drinking in Kelly's bar ... there is no independent witness to their journey home ... and thanks to the scrubbed CCTV there is no record of when they arrived nor an independent witness to their arrival.

Call it hearsay but witness T is the the only source we have of the child in Rua Escola having bare feet.

[Brietta]

That's an interesting leap of logic? I asked why the Smiths were not seen as independent witnesses and you came up with that. Do you understand what independent means?

Do you?

[Brietta]

Call it hearsay but witness T is the the only source we have of the child in Rua Escola having bare feet.

One wonders why such a perceptive witness wasn't taken back to Portugal to make a witness statement ... he might even have had a clear recollection of visual features to share with the investigators.

[pegasus]

One wonders why such a perceptive witness wasn't taken back to Portugal to make a witness statement ... he might even have had a clear recollection of visual features to share with the investigators.

Yes ideally better if all 9 had been flown to Portimao in late May 2006 rather than just 3 of them.
T is the only source for bare feet and I am surprised the appeal doesn't also mention the man's black jacket which T saw.
T and A were IMO more observant than the adults.
Maybe it was T who did one of the pair of "smith sighting" photofits for the PI's ?

[Brietta]

Yes ideally better if all 9 had been flown to Portimao in late May 2006 rather than just 3 of them.
T is the only source for bare feet and I am surprised the appeal doesn't also mention the man's black jacket which T saw.
T and A were IMO more observant than the adults.
Maybe it was T who did one of the pair of "smith sighting" photofits for the PI's ?

Certainly it is unlikely to have been the three interviewed, whose recall months after the event is unlikely to have improved on their inability to do so a fortnight after the event.

[pegasus]

Certainly it is unlikely to have been the three interviewed, whose recall months after the event is unlikely to have improved on their inability to do so a fortnight after the event.

Agreed, more likely to not those 3 but one of the others who did a photofit for the PI's.