Author Topic: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?  (Read 144238 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline gilet

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #15 on: October 15, 2013, 11:34:18 PM »
Had just one of the other Smith family testified to having thought the man was Gerry McCann then it would be more convincing. As things stand his evidence while credible is just not persuasive enough to convince anyone who is looking at the situation with an open mind.

Its possible he was right but on balance very unlikely.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #16 on: October 15, 2013, 11:37:28 PM »
Had just one of the other Smith family testified to having thought the man was Gerry McCann then it would be more convincing. As things stand his evidence while credible is just not persuasive enough to convince anyone who is looking at the situation with an open mind.

Its possible he was right but on balance very unlikely.

You still haven't answered my question gilet.

Do you believe Martin Smith was correct when he claimed that his wife agreed with him that the gentleman they saw may gave been Gerry McCann ?
« Last Edit: February 16, 2016, 12:44:20 PM by John »
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline sadie

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #17 on: October 15, 2013, 11:40:02 PM »
You still haven't answered my question gilet.

Do you believe Martin Smith was correct when he claimed that his wife agreed with him that the gentleman they saw may gave been Gerry McCann ?
I am more inclined to think that the PJ Ispector who was interested in his take might have embriodered it a little.  He isn't known for his honesty, is he?

Offline faithlilly

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #18 on: October 15, 2013, 11:51:48 PM »
Martin Smith said in his 30th of January 2008 statement to the guardai that his wife agreed with him that the man they saw with the child may have been a Gerry McCann. I posted the extract earlier.

It is becoming very apparent that you don't want to answer my question directly gilet. I wonder why that is ?
« Last Edit: February 16, 2016, 12:46:31 PM by John »
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline faithlilly

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #19 on: October 15, 2013, 11:57:00 PM »
I have never said that Martin Smith is not a credible witness. But being a credible witness who thinks that he might have seen something does not and never will be accepted by anyone who has any background in law as proof. When not one of the other witnesses agrees with him (except in his own hearsay comment) then I a perfectly at liberty to point that out and to say that on balance and with a number of other perfectly credible witnesses locating Gerry McCann elsewhere at the same moment then on balance the proof lies not with Mr Smith.

In this country an identification parade would definitely been staged and I believe something similar was being arranged by Amaral before he was removed from the case.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #20 on: October 16, 2013, 12:03:37 AM »
In this country an identification parade would definitely been staged and I believe something similar was being arranged by Amaral before he was removed from the case.
The Portuguese think that it's better to wash the laundry in the family, a fortiori if the dirty linen belong to a foreigner.

Offline Miro

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #21 on: November 01, 2013, 12:02:36 AM »
Martin Smith seems to be 60-80% sure according to the notes on file.

Play is made that only one other family member agreed, his wife.

Please could someone advise the names and ages of the other family members present please............

Thank you

Offline sadie

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #22 on: November 01, 2013, 12:14:50 AM »
Martin Smith seems to be 60-80% sure according to the notes on file.

Play is made that only one other family member agreed, his wife.

Please could someone advise the names and ages of the other family members present please............

Thank you
But it is only hearsay that his wife agreed.... according to Martin Smith she backed him
She did not want to give a statement.

Just hearsay.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #23 on: November 01, 2013, 12:15:57 AM »
Martin Smith seems to be 60-80% sure according to the notes on file.

Play is made that only one other family member agreed, his wife.

Please could someone advise the names and ages of the other family members present please............

Thank you

We have had no direct quote from anyone that Martin Smith has changed his mind about his previous identification and until we do I'd hold the claim at arm's length.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Miro

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #24 on: November 01, 2013, 12:16:57 AM »
But it is only hearsay that his wife agreed.... according to Martin Smith she backed him
She did not want to give a statement.

Just hearsay.

Thank you - do you know this :

"Please could someone advise the names and ages of the other family members present please............"

Offline faithlilly

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #25 on: November 01, 2013, 12:17:42 AM »
But it is only hearsay that his wife agreed.... according to Martin Smith she backed him
She did not want to give a statement.

Just hearsay.

So what reason do you have for believing Martin Smith was not genuine ?
« Last Edit: February 16, 2016, 12:56:02 PM by John »
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #26 on: November 01, 2013, 12:18:27 AM »
Martin Smith seems to be 60-80% sure according to the notes on file.

Play is made that only one other family member agreed, his wife.

Please could someone advise the names and ages of the other family members present please............

Thank you
The PJ files are available on line for anybody
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm
Mr Smith wasn't identifying someone in a parade, he was just giving a lead to the police.
Nothing more, nothing less.

Offline pathfinder73

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #27 on: November 01, 2013, 12:24:15 AM »
If you are working from an inaccurate timeline then of course one person can't be in two places at once. I agree they were in the tapas bar when Kate raised the alarm. It would be idiotic for someone to disappear at this time but not as soon as the alarm is raised when people are splitting up and going in different directions to search for Madeleine.

I don't believe Kate raised the alarm at 10pm which as taken as fact. I believe it was raised before 10pm (anyone directly involved would want the timeline to be later even if it's only 3 minutes, the half hour checks are being presumed as fact 9pm, 9.30pm, 10pm) and that the Smith family passed the suspect at an estimate time of 10.02pm. Mrs Smith was sure on the time and she said they left Kelly's bar at 10pm (see statement excerpt below).

This gives an estimate period of 4 minutes from the start of the first searches for someone to run (as many were doing in a panic not knowing which way they were going but I believe someone knew exactly where he was heading) and get to the spot where he was seen by the Smith family. One person being in two places at once is not impossible if the timeline turns out to be inaccurate.

Aoife Smith Statement
— Around 22H00, they left Kelly's Bar. The group headed, on foot, for their apartment.
— Questioned, she responds that she knows the time that they left because her father and her brother decided to leave early that night. There were two reasons for this: one was the fact that her sister-in-law was not feeling very well and the other was because her brother, sister-in-law, nephew and son of her sister-in-law finished their holiday the next day and had to catch the morning flight returning to Ireland.
— Upon leaving the bar, they turned right and headed along the road for 40/50 metres. At this point, they again turned to the right and ascended a small street with stairs that give access to Rua 25 de Abril. As they were a large group (four adults and five children) they travelled apart from each other along the street with some more to the front and the others more behind. She does not remember how they were divided [who was where].
— The deponent remembers that upon reaching the top of the stairs, she looked to her left and saw a man (1) with a female child (2) in his arms, walking along the pavement of Rua 25 de Abril. He was walking in her direction at a distance of, give or take, two metres.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2013, 12:31:55 AM by pathfinder73 »
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 Miro

Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #28 on: November 01, 2013, 12:32:45 AM »
The PJ files are available on line for anybody
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm
Mr Smith wasn't identifying someone in a parade, he was just giving a lead to the police.
Nothing more, nothing less.

Anne - thanks for the link - that's very understated...........its a man giving an account of seeing a man carrying a child, when the MaCann's believed their child had been abducted and the child matches the description. Its a very hot lead, surely that's not denied.   The majority of the Smith party are young and would therefore be excused from not giving statements.  Of the 4 adults (think thats right) 3 give broadly matching statements of whom they saw.  It was as strong a lead at the Turner sighting........ ?

Aegean

  • Guest
Re: Was Martin Smith mistaken about his 60% - 80% certainty after all?
« Reply #29 on: November 01, 2013, 12:43:43 AM »
Correct. What is your point?

Mr Smith cannot testify as to what his wife thought any more than Gerry McCann can. They can offer hearsay but it is not acceptable evidence.

gilet, it sounds like you've been watching too many American tv cop shows (and fantasising that you're living in one). By the way, we're not in a court of law here, we can consider whatever we want to consider. For the police, such statements are valuable because they give leads. If Gerry McCann is ever put on trial for the disapparance of Madeleine I doubt the Smith sightings are going to be the main evidence, I'm sure they'll have a lot more before they ever get to that stage.

Besides, since Mrs Smith is apparently still alive she can testify what she wants, if there is ever a court hearing.

Aoife Smith is 60% sure that the little girl she saw was Madeleine.