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

[ferryman]

In January 2008 there was a live and on-going police enquiry (finally shelved in August 2008).

When the Smith efits were produced, there was none.

Publication of the efits had to wait until there was a police enquiry to justify publication.

That's how police enquiries work (at least in England).

[faithlilly]

In January 2008 there was a live and on-going police enquiry (finally shelved in August 2008).

When the Smith efits were produced, there was none.

Publication of the efits had to wait until there was a police enquiry to justify publication.

That's how police enquiries work (at least in England).

Where are you getting your information from ferryman ? Do you have a link ?

[ferryman]

Where are you getting your information from ferryman ? Do you have a link ?

It's how police enquiries work.

[pegasus]

But had no interest in publicising an e-fit of someone seen actually carrying a child who sounded far more like his daughter than the child seen by Jane Tanner who couldn't see the hair colour or length. All she had was a quick glimse of some pyjama bottoms.

The PR machine stated that identifying cooperman was the most urgent thing in the case. But when, a few days later, a man was reported in Altura who was the spitting image of cooperman, the same PR machine seemed oddly uninterested.

[Carana]

But had no interest in publicising an e-fit of someone seen actually carrying a child who sounded far more like his daughter than the child seen by Jane Tanner who couldn't see the hair colour or length. All she had was a quick glimse of some pyjama bottoms.

Did the McCanns have the legal right to reproduce the two (supposedly) Smith-related e-fits prior to when they were actually publicised?

And, if so, which active police force would have thoroughly investigated them?

[G-Unit]

Did the McCanns have the legal right to reproduce the two (supposedly) Smith-related e-fits prior to when they were actually publicised?

And, if so, which active police force would have thoroughly investigated them?

They belonged to them otherwise they could not have threatened the Oakley investigators with legal action if they didn't keep them and the report confidential.

[pegasus]

Ah, ok, they were advised to sit on them then?

"they" is vague it could mean 4 or 3 or 2 or 1 person who was sitting on.

[G-Unit]

Did the McCanns have the legal right to reproduce the two (supposedly) Smith-related e-fits prior to when they were actually publicised?

And, if so, which active police force would have thoroughly investigated them?

Which active police force was going to investigate the results of the release of the 'Victoria Beckham' e-fit, publicised by Clarence Mitchell and Dave Edgar in August 2009? Answer? None.

[ferryman]

Which active police force was going to investigate the results of the release of the 'Victoria Beckham' e-fit, publicised by Clarence Mitchell and Dave Edgar in August 2009? Answer? None.

As is well known, Australia is almost on the doorstep of Praia da Luz ....

OK

Australian accent.

Seen in Spain 3 days later.

That's another country (albeit neighbouring) and definitely not a witness of Madeleine's abduction as it happened (as the Smith sighting, conceivably, might have been).

There's the difference.

You need a live and on-going police enquiry to unveil the Smith sighting.

That's why Scotland Yard (who had the efits in their possession for a considerable period before they, themselves, released them) chose the moment they did (the moment of the Crimewatch programme) to release the efits publicly.

[G-Unit]

As is well known, Australia is almost on the doorstep of Praia da Luz ....

OK

Australian accent.

Seen in Spain 3 days later.

That's another country (albeit neighbouring) and definitely not a witness of Madeleine's abduction as it happened (as the Smith sighting, conceivably, might have been).

There's the difference.

You need a live and on-going police enquiry to unveil the Smith sighting.

That's why Scotland Yard (who had the efits in their possession for a considerable period before they, themselves, released them) chose the moment they did (the moment of the Crimewatch programme) to release the efits publicly.

Cooperman? No police involvement in the release of his e-fit? No interest in it by the PJ.

If the McCanns had wanted to publicise the Smithman e-fits they would have, regardless of any live investigation. Who would have stopped them?

[ferryman]

Cooperman? No police involvement in the release of his e-fit? No interest in it by the PJ.

If the McCanns had wanted to publicise the Smithman e-fits they would have, regardless of any live investigation. Who would have stopped them?

Scotland Yard chose the moment to release the Smith efits, not the McCanns.

The McCanns just handed them on to Scotland Yard.

If you have a beef, direct it against Scotland Yard.

[stephen25000]

Scotland Yard chose the moment to release the Smith efits, not the McCanns.

The McCanns just handed them on to Scotland Yard.

If you have a beef, direct it against Scotland Yard.

Pray tell, what stopped the mccanns doing that ?

After all, she was their beloved daughter ?

[jassi]

Scotland Yard chose the moment to release the Smith efits, not the McCanns.

The McCanns just handed them on to Scotland Yard.

If you have a beef, direct it against Scotland Yard.

Only once   SY had got hold of them. McCanns could have released them long before that had they so chosen.

[stephen25000]

As is well known, Australia is almost on the doorstep of Praia da Luz ....

OK

Australian accent.

Seen in Spain 3 days later.

That's another country (albeit neighbouring) and definitely not a witness of Madeleine's abduction as it happened (as the Smith sighting, conceivably, might have been).

There's the difference.

You need a live and on-going police enquiry to unveil the Smith sighting.

That's why Scotland Yard (who had the efits in their possession for a considerable period before they, themselves, released them) chose the moment they did (the moment of the Crimewatch programme) to release the efits publicly.

Here we go again, abduction....

You do know ferryman, that this woman was never actually investigated, and to put it mildly Mitchell and Edgar were economical with the truth in saying the woman  was.

[Carana]

They belonged to them otherwise they could not have threatened the Oakley investigators with legal action if they didn't keep them and the report confidential.

Sorry, I don't follow.

Many contracts include a confidentiality clause.