Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?

[ferryman]

Pure conjecture you mean.

Rumour said the McCann's PI's wanted to speak to him in early January 2008. During his final interview (30th January) he said he'd been contacted by Brian Kennedy and had refused a meeting.

Now detectives hired by Madeleine's parents want to speak to Martin Smith and his family.
Daily Mirror
 
Paul Byrne in Praia da Luz
3/01/2008
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html

Oakley were working for the McCanns from April to September 2008. When the investigators did the e-fits with Mr Smith is not known.

The first investigation was shelved in early August 2008.

The efits were produced after that.

And therefore could not be released publicly until a fresh investigation was launched.

For the reasons i have stated above.

[G-Unit]

The first investigation was shelved in early August 2008.

The efits were produced after that.

And therefore could not be released publicly until a fresh investigation was launched.

For the reasons i have stated above.

Your basis for that statement being.............conjecture?

[ferryman]

Your basis for that statement being.............conjecture?

What would be the point of asking him to produce an efit if they had already been produced?

[G-Unit]

What would be the point of asking him to produce an efit if they had already been produced?

You've lost me there. Who asked him and who had already produced them?

[ferryman]

You've lost me there. Who asked him and who had already produced them?

Mr Smith was asked (for the first time) to produce an efit at the end of January 2008.  He refused (because he believed he had seen Gerry).

Release of the files persuaded him he was mistaken (to suppose he had seen Gerry) and he agreed (to produce efits).

Same for his wife, Mary.

The efits could only be released when there was an ongoing enquiry.

Scotland Yard chose the moment  of the Crimewatch programme to release the efits publicly.

[G-Unit]

Mr Smith was asked (for the first time) to produce an efit at the end of January 2008.  He refused (because he believed he had seen Gerry).

Release of the files persuaded him he was mistaken (to suppose he had seen Gerry) and he agreed (to produce efits).

Same for his wife, Mary.

The efits could only be released when there was an ongoing enquiry.

Scotland Yard chose the moment  of the Crimewatch programme to release the efits publicly.

Conjecture. You have no idea when or why he agreed to produce the e-fits. Stop making it up as you go along.

[ferryman]

Conjecture. You have no idea when or why he agreed to produce the e-fits. Stop making it up as you go along.

You are making up your objections as I go along.

Which is quite different.

[mercury]

Conjecture. You have no idea when or why he agreed to produce the e-fits. Stop making it up as you go along.

Added to that, it's hard to figure out why it would be relevant or not what Smith thought about Gerry or the price of milk in the sense that the efits produced would surely? be the same whenever and whoever they were made for...iyswim

[G-Unit]

You are making up your objections as I go along.

Which is quite different.

I'm just trying to keep your feet on the ground. Stating conjecture as fact just leads to false conclusions. Stick to things you know you can produce cites for. You are desperately trying to make people believe Martin Smith was mistaken, but you can't. He never said he changed his mind. he never said he was mistaken when he identified Gerry McCann.

[ferryman]

I'm just trying to keep your feet on the ground. Stating conjecture as fact just leads to false conclusions. Stick to things you know you can produce cites for. You are desperately trying to make people believe Martin Smith was mistaken, but you can't. He never said he changed his mind. he never said he was mistaken when he identified Gerry McCann.

That Mr Smith did not change his mind is conjecture.

Inaccurate conjecture at that.

I prefer to stick to the facts.

[mercury]

That Mr Smith did not change his mind is conjecture.

Inaccurate conjecture at that.

I prefer to stick to the facts.

You have no evidence or proof for what you profess.....those are the facts!

Wash, rinse , spin , repeat seems to be the name of the game here


 %£&)**#

[ferryman]

You have no evidence or proof for what you profess.....those are the facts!

Wash, rinse , spin , repeat seems to be the name of the game here


 %£&)**#

The facts support the conclusion that Mr Smith and his wife both changed their minds.

[mercury]

The facts support the conclusion that Mr Smith and his wife both changed their minds.

We can ding dong all evening, you have your VIEW, that is all it is.....an interpretation of information...no solid evidence or proof.....ergo you have no right to state anything as a fact....well, you do, it's called freedom of thought and expression, but it doesn't make any utterance true

[ferryman]

We can ding dong all evening, you have your VIEW, that is all it is.....an interpretation of information...no solid evidence or proof.....ergo you have no right to state anything as a fact....well, you do, it's called freedom of thought and expression, but it doesn't make any utterance true

If Martin Smith goes on record to say he still suspects the McCanns, I will eat humble pie.

Not until ....

[mercury]

If Martin Smith goes on record to say he still suspects the McCanns, I will eat humble pie.

Not until ....

And if you ever produce a verbatim quote that he doesn't think it was Gerry he saw, as he was convinced 60-80% , as you claimed, I will too