as far as the smiths are concerned..they didnt even see his fce...
Where on earth did you get that from? All you seem to want to do is discredit anything that links the disappearance to the parents... We should stick to the facts as they were described by those that witnessed them:
" 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" (Martin Smith's statement)
"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. " (Aofie Smith's statement)
"The description of the individual who carried the child was: Caucasian, around 175 to 180 cm tall. About 35 years, or older. He was somewhat tanned as a result of sun exposure. Average build, in good shape. Short hair, brown in colour. He does not remember if he wore glasses, or had a beard or a moustache." (Peter Smith's statement)
So they did see his face!!
The big question for me is why didn't Mitchell present Smithman as a suspect?
