The timeline revisited

[Mr Gray]

In all honesty do you believe neither Smithman nor Tannerman were carrying Madeleine McCann?

I believe it's highly unlikely either were

[Vertigo Swirl]

Where does that mention "the Met"?

you do know Redwood worked for the Met right?  Look, let’s cut to the chase: do you now accept that there is no record of Mrs Totman’s statement to the Portuguese police in the Files and that the Met therefore did not ignore her testimony for the simple reason they didn’t know about it?

[G-Unit]

            😁 You haven't a clue really and your OPINION just does not count 😁

Things just are not panning out as you think they should.  What a pity.  All those wasted years!  Sigh.

It's the Mirror, not me, which is spreading erroneous opinions which mislead some to believe there is useful mobile phone evidence.

I have no preconceptions of how things should 'pan out', by the way. Nor do I feel I have wasted my time, so I need no pity.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

The dogs only alerted to things McCann... And Eddies behaviour changed as soon as he entered 5a.. According  to Grime.

So what other explanation is there if Grime and his dogs are so reliable

That's whataboutery. Grime never claimed the alerts proved there was a cadaver in 5A. He said they were indicative that there was a possibility that forensic evidence could be collected from the areas where the dogs alerted. Grime was very clear that it was the evidence that might be collected that was important when working with these dogs. This shows, imo, that he acted professionally. Your only explanation of the alerts has Grime acting with gross professional misconduct for the purpose of feathering his own nest.

Not only does your explanation fly in the face of how Grime conducting himself professionally in this case but it also makes no sense. A series of false alerts do not make his case for the usefulness of EVR dogs and as such would have served him no purpose (assuming, as you seem to, that he wasn't a professional police officer but instead a rogue maverick on the take).

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

you do know Redwood worked for the Met right?  Look, let’s cut to the chase: do you now accept that there is no record of Mrs Totman’s statement to the Portuguese police in the Files and that the Met therefore did not ignore her testimony for the simple reason they didn’t know about it?

That is certainly a possibility. However, it seems unlikely given that both law enforcement bodies talked about sharing information from a very early stage. Tannerman was trumpeted by the group around the McCann's as THE ABDUCTOR. Perhaps then the most important part of the abduction narrative from a very early stage. Surely, although possible, it's hard to believe that the two forces didn't discuss Tannerman (or Totman - if indeed that's who Jane Tanner saw... and there's no consensus here about that)

[Vertigo Swirl]

That's whataboutery. Grime never claimed the alerts proved there was a cadaver in 5A. He said they were indicative that there was a possibility that forensic evidence could be collected from the areas where the dogs alerted. Grime was very clear that it was the evidence that might be collected that was important when working with these dogs. This shows, imo, that he acted professionally. Your only explanation of the alerts has Grime acting with gross professional misconduct for the purpose of feathering his own nest.

Not only does your explanation fly in the face of how Grime conducting himself professionally in this case but it also makes no sense. A series of false alerts do not make his case for the usefulness of EVR dogs and as such would have served him no purpose (assuming, as you seem to, that he wasn't a professional police officer but instead a rogue maverick on the take).

Think about it - if the dogs had never alerted we’d never have heard of Martin Grime.  He got millions of pounds of free advertising thanks to those barks.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

I believe it's highly unlikely either were

Why is that? And don't you think it is therefore strange that Smithman (if not involved) has not identified himself in such a high profile case?

[Vertigo Swirl]

That is certainly a possibility. However, it seems unlikely given that both law enforcement bodies talked about sharing information from a very early stage. Tannerman was trumpeted by the group around the McCann's as THE ABDUCTOR. Perhaps then the most important part of the abduction narrative from a very early stage. Surely, although possible, it's hard to believe that the two forces didn't discuss Tannerman (or Totman - if indeed that's who Jane Tanner saw... and there's no consensus here about that)

You have completely avoided the point and ignored the rationale I gave in my previous post on the subject which shows that Totman’s statement almost certainly  never even reached the PJ.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

Think about it - if the dogs had never alerted we’d never have heard of Martin Grime.  He got millions of pounds of free advertising thanks to those barks.

What, as the man whose dogs gave false alerts? I don't think so!!

In my opinion he conducted himself professionally in this case.

[Vertigo Swirl]

What, as the man whose dogs gave false alerts? I don't think so!!

In my opinion he conducted himself professionally in this case.

It would have been  a gamble but Madeleine had been missing for months.  He probably felt quite secure in thr belief that she was dead by then, so a low risk gamble with lots to gain IMO.  Though I doubt it was quite as conscious a decision as that.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

You have completely avoided the point and ignored the rationale I gave in my previous post on the subject which shows that Totman’s statement almost certainly  never even reached the PJ.

You keep changing the goal posts... first you claimed I said something about Totman and "The Met"... I just re-read all my posts since the one where you quote me and I never said anything about the Met..... Then you retort "Redwood was in the Met you know" (or words to that effect) I checked again and I didn't mention Redwood either in the post of mine you are quoting...... and now it's "never even reached the PJ".... I have no way of knowing if that's true. All I've read about Totman is what his wife reportedly said in a Scottish newspaper some other credible media reports and a few other uncorroborated tales on the internet.

I have no reason to doubt Totman's wife. I have no reason to doubt which police agency they told (see below). I  have seen no evidence either way but it seems somewhat incredible that this information wasn't shared with the PJ given the trumpeted central importance of Tannerman.

In October 2007 the McCanns put out a sketch of the Tannerman but Mr Totman had already told the Guarda Nacional Republicana in May that it was probably him but they kept looking for the suspect.

It was only in 2011 after Scotland Yard took over the investigation that Det Chief Insp Andy Redwood, who led the probe from Britain, described a 'moment of revelation' when they became 'almost certain this sighting [Tannerman] is not the abductor.'

After this the Met went on the hunt for the so-called 'Smithman' - a man seen carrying a child away from the Ocean Club resort by Irish tourist Martin Smith.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5698933/Madeleine-McCann-police-spent-four-years-trying-ID-man-GP-said-him.html

It's not clear who "they" refers to in that Daily Fail article (that's just an aside VS - my thoughts on Totman are above)

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

It would have been  a gamble but Madeleine had been missing for months.  He probably felt quite secure in thr belief that she was dead by then, so a low risk gamble with lots to gain IMO.  Though I doubt it was quite as conscious a decision as that.

With all due respect why are you rightly upset if the McCann's are unfairly slurred in public yet you are happy to do the same to Grime? I have yet to see any evidence to show he acted with gross professional misconduct in order to feather his own nest.

[Vertigo Swirl]

You keep changing the goal posts... first you claimed I said something about Totman and "The Met"... I just re-read all my posts since the one where you quote me and I never said anything about the Met..... Then you retort "Redwood was in the Met you know" (or words to that effect) I checked again and I didn't mention Redwood either in the post of mine you are quoting...... and now it's "never even reached the PJ".... I have no way of knowing if that's true. All I've read about Totman is what his wife reportedly said in a Scottish newspaper some other credible media reports and a few other uncorroborated tales on the internet.

I have no reason to doubt Totman's wife. I have no reason to doubt which police agency they told (see below). I  have seen no evidence either way but it seems somewhat incredible that this information wasn't shared with the PJ given the trumpeted central importance of Tannerman.

In October 2007 the McCanns put out a sketch of the Tannerman but Mr Totman had already told the Guarda Nacional Republicana in May that it was probably him but they kept looking for the suspect.

It was only in 2011 after Scotland Yard took over the investigation that Det Chief Insp Andy Redwood, who led the probe from Britain, described a 'moment of revelation' when they became 'almost certain this sighting [Tannerman] is not the abductor.'

After this the Met went on the hunt for the so-called 'Smithman' - a man seen carrying a child away from the Ocean Club resort by Irish tourist Martin Smith.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5698933/Madeleine-McCann-police-spent-four-years-trying-ID-man-GP-said-him.html

It's not clear who "they" refers to in that Daily Fail article (that's just an aside VS - my thoughts on Totman are above)

Dear or dear oh dear.  I suggest you start from the top of page 150 of this thread and read the conversation between us.  There you will see where you mentioned Redwood (who used to work for the Met).  Explain how the PJ knew about Totman from the off, but it was never mentioned either by Amaral in his book to pour cold water on Tannerman or in the final report to rule out JT’s sighting?  Do you think they knew about Totman but decided not to rule out Tannerman by ever publicly mentioning Totman?

[Mr Gray]

Why is that? And don't you think it is therefore strange that Smithman (if not involved) has not identified himself in such a high profile case?

As far as I am aware.. There has never been an appeal for smithman in Portugal.. Crazy I know... So no.. Not odd he hasn't I'd himself

[Vertigo Swirl]

With all due respect why are you rightly upset if the McCann's are unfairly slurred in public yet you are happy to do the same to Grime? I have yet to see any evidence to show he acted with gross professional misconduct in order to feather his own nest.

I might ask you the same question in reverse.  I’ve never seen you spring to the defence of the McCanns when it is suggested that they lied in their statements, yet you seem very defensive of Grime and won’t have a word said against him.  As I said in my previous post I don’t believe he consciously decided to stitch up the McCanns but I do think it’s possible that he was hoping for a positive result and may have unconsciously transmitted that message to his dogs, an example can be seen with the way he kept calling the dog back to the McCanns car. IMO.