Author Topic: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?  (Read 156379 times)

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline misty

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #375 on: February 16, 2016, 09:00:17 PM »
We got us a choice there. Either SY are winding us up or they really mean it. Faites vos jeux.
We got us another choice. Try to finger RM again or not. On the latter it didn't work first time around so why do you think it will work this time round, ace ?

That particular option won't work on the basis that the man MS allegedly saw was most definitely not RM.

Offline misty

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #376 on: February 17, 2016, 10:26:30 PM »
From: Long Lindsay
Sent: 20th September, 2007 11:37
CC: Hughes John (DC)
Re: Smith Family

Rec via: TELEPHONE Series: 241 Ident: BC19-8286-1055 20/09/07
Telephone: *********
Locale: Portugal/Out of country
Origin: Mr. Martin Smith 'Ireland


Text: Reported that he passed a male carrying a child in Praia da Luz the night Maddie went missing. Went and made a statement to Portugal police in Portimao on 26th of May and returned to the U.K. Is saying that after seeing McCANNS on the news on 9th of September when they returned to the U.K. He has not slept and is worried sick. He states he was watching the 10 pm news on BBC and saw the McCANNS getting off the plane and coming down the steps. He states it was like watching an action replay of the night he saw the male carrying the child back in Portugal. He states the way Gerry was carrying his twin triggered something in his head. It was exactly the same way and look of the other male seen the night Maddy went missing. He also watched ITV news and SKY news and inferred it looked like the same person both times carrying the children. Is asking a member of the OP Task Force to ring him back. He was with a group of 9 family and friends the night he saw the male in Portugal. He sounded quite shaken and worried whilst speaking to me.
Rec by: TPHONE Serial: 241 Ident:BC19-8286 1055 20/09/07
1101 8286-BC19 Incident linked to 209 26/06/07
1101 8286-BC19 Incident Result ODI: ADMIN DUPLICATE INCIDENT
QNG: QUALIFIER NOT REQUIRED
1101 8286-BC19 Incident Closed

Lindsay Long
Holmes Indexer
Major Crime
Braunstone Police Station

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Am I reading the part in bold correctly - MS was actually in Portugal when he made the call about his revelation moment?

Offline Carana

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #377 on: February 17, 2016, 11:14:45 PM »
From: Long Lindsay
Sent: 20th September, 2007 11:37
CC: Hughes John (DC)
Re: Smith Family

Rec via: TELEPHONE Series: 241 Ident: BC19-8286-1055 20/09/07
Telephone: *********
Locale: Portugal/Out of country
Origin: Mr. Martin Smith 'Ireland


Text: Reported that he passed a male carrying a child in Praia da Luz the night Maddie went missing. Went and made a statement to Portugal police in Portimao on 26th of May and returned to the U.K. Is saying that after seeing McCANNS on the news on 9th of September when they returned to the U.K. He has not slept and is worried sick. He states he was watching the 10 pm news on BBC and saw the McCANNS getting off the plane and coming down the steps. He states it was like watching an action replay of the night he saw the male carrying the child back in Portugal. He states the way Gerry was carrying his twin triggered something in his head. It was exactly the same way and look of the other male seen the night Maddy went missing. He also watched ITV news and SKY news and inferred it looked like the same person both times carrying the children. Is asking a member of the OP Task Force to ring him back. He was with a group of 9 family and friends the night he saw the male in Portugal. He sounded quite shaken and worried whilst speaking to me.
Rec by: TPHONE Serial: 241 Ident:BC19-8286 1055 20/09/07
1101 8286-BC19 Incident linked to 209 26/06/07
1101 8286-BC19 Incident Result ODI: ADMIN DUPLICATE INCIDENT
QNG: QUALIFIER NOT REQUIRED
1101 8286-BC19 Incident Closed

Lindsay Long
Holmes Indexer
Major Crime
Braunstone Police Station

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Am I reading the part in bold correctly - MS was actually in Portugal when he made the call about his revelation moment?

No idea. If he was in PT, he could have simply contacted the PJ.

Could "locale" refer to the location of the subject-matter? As opposed to a sighting in Timbuktu?

Offline pathfinder73

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #378 on: February 17, 2016, 11:18:47 PM »
Yes the sighting was in Portugal i.e. out of country.
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Offline misty

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #379 on: February 18, 2016, 01:33:06 AM »
@Pegasus
You're good with data. What do you make as the country of origin of the phone number a/a?

Offline Carana

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #380 on: February 18, 2016, 09:48:06 AM »
There's a mistake in the transcription.
The original reads
Location: Portugal / OFA.Out of force area
Origin: Mr Martin Smith-Ireland

Further down in the police codes: Sect:OFA


Offline pegasus

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #381 on: February 20, 2016, 01:09:18 AM »
@Pegasus
You're good with data. What do you make as the country of origin of the phone number a/a?
The number is +353 41 984 ****  which is in the Drogheda area

Offline misty

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #382 on: February 20, 2016, 01:22:16 AM »
The number is +353 41 984 ****  which is in the Drogheda area

I'm on about the one which starts 0055, not his home number.
Is it a phone number or the IMEI number do you think?

Offline pegasus

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #383 on: February 20, 2016, 01:51:04 AM »
I'm on about the one which starts 0055, not his home number.
Is it a phone number or the IMEI number do you think?
Not sure where is 0055. The phone number in post above "Telephone:*********" is 005341984**** which has a missing digit so is really 0035341984**** = landline in Drogheda area.
(Hope this doesn't start a Cuban conspiracy theory)
« Last Edit: February 20, 2016, 01:57:49 AM by pegasus »

Offline misty

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #384 on: February 20, 2016, 02:03:12 AM »
Not sure where is 0055. The phone number in post above "Telephone:*********" is 005341984**** which has a missing digit so is really 0035341984**** = landline in Drogheda area.
(Hope this doesn't start a Cuban conspiracy theory)

Ah, thanks. I see now. (I couldn't see where Cuba could be factored in) .
So he didn't call from his own line. Says Third Party on the document. I wonder who made the call?

Offline pathfinder73

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #385 on: February 20, 2016, 02:10:09 AM »
This witness was heard again by the Drogheda Irish police on 23-01-08, having been shown a video clip of Gerald McCann’s departure by plane carrying one of the twins. This witness maintains his belief that judging by the posture, there seemed to be a probability of 60-80% that the person seen by him was Madeleine’s father.
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Offline misty

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #386 on: February 20, 2016, 02:21:50 AM »
This witness was heard again by the Drogheda Irish police on 23-01-08, having been shown a video clip of Gerald McCann’s departure by plane carrying one of the twins. This witness maintains his belief that judging by the posture, there seemed to be a probability of 60-80% that the person seen by him was Madeleine’s father.

The witness was mistaken. The witness could only confirm his sighting was most definitely 100% not the man he had seen only twice in his life, with & without glasses.

Offline pegasus

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #387 on: February 20, 2016, 03:01:14 AM »
Ah, thanks. I see now. (I couldn't see where Cuba could be factored in) .
So he didn't call from his own line. Says Third Party on the document. I wonder who made the call?
The missing 3 makes it look like Cuba Misty. 0053=Cuba, 00353=Ireland, 41 = Drogheda area landline, "not a TK" = "not a telephone kiosk". The caller was witness M Smith, phoning Leics police.


Offline pathfinder73

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #388 on: February 20, 2016, 09:12:04 AM »
The witness was mistaken. The witness could only confirm his sighting was most definitely 100% not the man he had seen only twice in his life, with & without glasses.

That's not what he said. He said it was definitely not RM.
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Offline misty

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #389 on: February 20, 2016, 11:37:52 AM »
That's not what he said. He said it was definitely not RM.

But he wasn't asked that specific question, was he?
He could have said "I didn't recognise the man as anyone I'd encountered in PdL during my holiday."
Why did he need to rule RM out as a candidate for Smithman before he'd even been ruled in?