What if the Smith family had come forward on the 4th of May?

[alphonse]

Do you think the PJ would have solved the case? 

[Holly Goodhead]

Do you think the PJ would have solved the case?

Imo both 'Tannerman' and 'Smithman' are red herrings so on this basis no. 

I place a lot of weight on the S&R dogs neither of which scented to the above locations. 

I don't understand what imo amounts to a fixation with these sightings.  Especially given that OC operated a night creche whereby parents put their children to bed, in what sounds like a dormitory sort of arrangement, and then collected them later.  PDL was/is a self-contained hol destination so the chances are families with small children holidaying for a week will not bother with a hire car hence we see men walking round with babes in arms. 

[alphonse]

I think the fixation just stems from there is almost nothing else to go on. You could indeed be correct that both sightings have no bearing on the case.

[Holly Goodhead]

I think the fixation just stems from there is almost nothing else to go on. You could indeed be correct that both sightings have no bearing on the case.

I think there's enough to work out what happened.  The unlocked patio doors and the S&R dogs are massive clues imo.

[ShiningInLuz]

Do you think the PJ would have solved the case?

Given what happened with Tannerman, the short answer is no.

Now for an explanation.

On the 4th May, a chunk of the Smith family were occupied getting to Faro airport for an early flight to Ireland.  They had not, by that time heard of MBM, nor of her appearance.

The PJ focus on 4 May was on getting 'proper' statements from the T9.  I can't remember if other elements had started working their way through OC employees.

The normal PJ approach was not to go public with case details.  A description of Tannerman took a long time to emerge.  A drawing of Tannerman took even longer.

The PJ does not appear to have checked the creche records.  There is no diligence in the PJ Files for this, and no copy of the creche records.

I've got no idea whether Smithman was a local or a visitor.  For all I know, Smithman went to Ireland on the same flight as the Smiths.  Or he went to Lisbon or Porto. Or he remained in Luz.

The PJ did not construct or publish the e-fits.  I don't know if they went public with his description.  The PJ have no capability comparable to Crimewatch.

Hopefully that explains my 'no'.

[alphonse]

Given what happened with Tannerman, the short answer is no.

Now for an explanation.

On the 4th May, a chunk of the Smith family were occupied getting to Faro airport for an early flight to Ireland.  They had not, by that time heard of MBM, nor of her appearance.

The PJ focus on 4 May was on getting 'proper' statements from the T9.  I can't remember if other elements had started working their way through OC employees.

The normal PJ approach was not to go public with case details.  A description of Tannerman took a long time to emerge.  A drawing of Tannerman took even longer.

The PJ does not appear to have checked the creche records.  There is no diligence in the PJ Files for this, and no copy of the creche records.

I've got no idea whether Smithman was a local or a visitor.  For all I know, Smithman went to Ireland on the same flight as the Smiths.  Or he went to Lisbon or Porto. Or he remained in Luz.

The PJ did not construct or publish the e-fits.  I don't know if they went public with his description.  The PJ have no capability comparable to Crimewatch.

Hopefully that explains my 'no'.

SIL-- Thanks for your very comprehensive reply.

[G-Unit]

I think there's enough to work out what happened.  The unlocked patio doors and the S&R dogs are massive clues imo.

One problem you have imo is your acceptance that the patio doors were regularly left unlocked. Do you have difinitive evidence that they were?

[alphonse]

One problem you have imo is your acceptance that the patio doors were regularly left unlocked. Do you have difinitive evidence that they were?

 I think this depends on whether you think there is a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by the other people at the table. Jane Tanner states it was obvious they were going in this way. Russell, I think, talks about the change of routine being mentioned at the table earlier in the week etc etc . Jez was told about the checking on the Wednesday. He then sees Gerry near the gate on the Thursday. Of course Madeleine could have died in an accident [ not my belief] ..........

[Robittybob1]

Do you think the PJ would have solved the case?

I'm sure there would have been a resolution.  There would have been footage of the man carrying the child as he passed the apartments where the Smiths were staying.  They may have picked up a track for Madeleine in that area of town and worked out which house she was taken to. 

[Robittybob1]

SIL-- Thanks for your very comprehensive reply.

I would cross check all of those statements made by SIL.  I noticed some that might not stand scrutiny.

[jassi]

I think this depends on whether you think there is a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by the other people at the table. Jane Tanner states it was obvious they were going in this way. Russell, I think, talks about the change of routine being mentioned at the table earlier in the week etc etc . Jez was told about the checking on the Wednesday. He then sees Gerry near the gate on the Thursday. Of course Madeleine could have died in an accident [ not my belief] ..........

This is something beyond my comprehension.
Why would anyone want to discuss their childcare arrangements with a relative stranger ?

[alphonse]

This is something beyond my comprehension.
Why would anyone want to discuss their childcare arrangements with a relative stranger ?

 I agree. I have always found this really weird BUT if Madeleine were to die in an accident on the Thursday how could Gerry know this on the Wednesday? Even Amaral says he is sure she was alive at  17.30 on the Thursday.

[jassi]

I agree. I have always found this really weird BUT if Madeleine were to die in an accident on the Thursday how could Gerry know this on the Wednesday? Even Amaral says he is sure she was alive at  17.30 on the Thursday.

Many people put little faith in his opinions. Why should they think he was correct about that ?

[Holly Goodhead]

One problem you have imo is your acceptance that the patio doors were regularly left unlocked. Do you have difinitive evidence that they were?

No one has definite evidence of anything other than MM disappeared.  It all comes down to what weight individuals give to the various pieces of info. 

I dismiss anything to do with sedation either by KM or abductor as I have some understanding of the science of sleep and know stages 3 and 4 are difficult to wake from.  I uploaded the youtube vid of an asleep SM carried by GM off the EasyJet flight oblivious to all the noise around him.  I don't buy into the cadaver dogs at all due to the problems with contamination.  LCN DNA testing is as good as useless due to the small sample sizes which are often degraded and incomplete producing the "inconclusive results".  I see the McCanns/T7 as unreliable witnesses due to their inevitable embarrassment, guilt and shame about the "childcare arrangements".  I think the shutter was in all probability 'staged' by either KM or abductor so in effect a 'red herring'.  I think Mrs Fenn is a credible and reliable independent witness with regard to what she heard on 1st May.  I think 'Tannerman' and 'Smithman' are in all probability 'red herrings' due to the fact OC run a night creche for holidaymakers scattered all over PDL.  I think the S&R dogs were reliable in scenting MM carried away by the abductor who entered the unlocked patio door and exited the front door with an alive but sleeping MM.

I don't believe any local person, OC employee or assoicate or organised criminal gang was involved.  I think it was another holiday maker.   

I might be wrong about all of the above, some of the above or none of the above but unless I see something compelling to change my mind on any of the above its now pretty much fixed as in my own mind I've worked out what happened and who was responsible and all the pieces of the puzzle fit together like a jigsaw or piece of flat pack furniture! 

[alphonse]

Many people put little faith in his opinions. Why should they think he was correct about that ?

    I can see no obvious reason to disbelieve the nannies at the high tea. I only mentioned Amaral as he had his theories of an accident etc. but he felt that happened between the high tea and the Mc Cann couple´s arrival at the Tapas. At least that´s how I understood it.