Author Topic: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?  (Read 26721 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sherlock Holmes

Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #30 on: November 02, 2013, 04:02:58 PM »
It trashed their bundleman theory and instead promoted a sighting of someone identified as Gerry.

What do you mean 'someone identified as Gerry'?

Offline Jazzy

Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #31 on: November 02, 2013, 04:03:30 PM »
They've always had an agenda, right from the begging - remember the bigger picture? 
Just don't ask me what it is, as I've never been able to follow the thought processes of the McCanns.

They've always had an agenda and yet you have no idea what it might be?

Offline Apostate

Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #32 on: November 02, 2013, 04:05:27 PM »
What do you mean 'someone identified as Gerry'?

Yawn. Enough of this tiresome attempt to distract.

Offline Sherlock Holmes

Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #33 on: November 02, 2013, 04:07:29 PM »
Bundleman theory has been 'trashed' by SY - and the McCanns seem fine about that. They say, in fact, that they are satisfied and encouraged by the work of SY and the response they are getting from the latest reconstruction.

So it seems that they are not so keen to protect the Bundleman theory.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #34 on: November 02, 2013, 04:08:16 PM »
given the strength of his alibi?
Why do you insist on an alibi he hasn't, SH ? Do you know at which exact time the alarm was launched ?
I don't doubt Mr McCann was at the table at this undetermined time though. But the AG wasn't sure and this is why, likely, he did list the "accidental homicide with concealment of body" hypothesis. Will you or not agree the AG thought this couldn't occur without Mr McCann being aware of it ?

Offline Jazzy

Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #35 on: November 02, 2013, 04:08:45 PM »
Yawn. Enough of this tiresome attempt to distract.

Distract from what?

Offline Sherlock Holmes

Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #36 on: November 02, 2013, 04:09:41 PM »
Yawn. Enough of this tiresome attempt to distract.

Gerry has at no point been identified as the person the Smith family saw. And unless there is a complete re-working of the sketch of events at the OC on the night, that is extremely unlikely to change.

Offline Apostate

Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #37 on: November 02, 2013, 04:10:00 PM »
Bundleman theory has been 'trashed' by SY - and the McCanns seem fine about that. They say, in fact, that they are satisfied and encouraged by the work of SY and the response they are getting from the latest reconstruction.

So it seems that they are not so keen to protect the Bundleman theory

they were keen for 5 years - even though their own detectives told them it was rubbish.

icabodcrane

  • Guest
Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #38 on: November 02, 2013, 04:11:00 PM »
We are being asked to discuss why the McCanns would suppress the e fits if there had  been no abduction   (  that the abduction had,  in fact,  been  'staged' by them in order to cover up their daughter's death  ?  )

It's a good question

You'd think,  wouldn't you,  that if that was the case, the McCanns would want as many  'abductor sightings'  as possible

So what could the motive be for keeping the information hidden for so long   ?

Well,  I suppose we need to look at what the McCanns did  not  keep quiet about  ...  The Tanner sighting

That sighting was not only heavily and consistantly pushed by the McCanns,  it was,  in fact,  the entire basis of their abduction theory

Jane Tanner  saw the abductor making off with Madeleine at 9.10pm  we have relentlessly been told ...  and,  as an aside,  we were advised that the man the Smiths saw was almost certainly the  same  man

Assuming that there  was  no abduction  ( and assuming that the McCanns had staged the crime )  I would say that there would be  a very  good reason for  the Tanner sighting  being pushed so hard  ... quite simply,   it gave Gerry an airtight alibi

Which brings us to the Smith sighting.  Henri Exton advised the McCanns that this evidence was more credible than Tanner's.  He  obtained  the e fits  and suggested they be released immediatly

The McCanns rejected his advice  and  took legal action to ensure Exton's confidentiality on the matter

Again, assuming that there  was no abduction  ( and assuming that the McCanns had staged the crime )  I would say  that  there would be a very good reason for the Smith sighting  not  being pushed hard   ...  quite simply,  Gerry  had  no alibi

It's something we have discussed frequently on the forum,  and,  despite  many attempts to confuse the issue,  the simple truth is that no-one,  other than his chums,  claimed to have seen  Gerry at the time the Smiths made their sighting  ...  not a single independent witness 

Not only that,  there has always been some doubt about the time the alarm was actually raised,  with a couple of witnesses claiming the alert was given considerably earlier than the 10.05pm claimed by the McCanns  (  one witness saying the party had already left the table by 9.45pm )

Assuming that there  was  no abduction  ( and assuming the McCanns had staged the crime  )  it might be said that they tried,  very hard,  to have the police  (  and everyone else )  concentrate on the  8.30pm/9.15pm time period  (  when Gerry was visible to independent witneses  )   ...  whilst determindly  distracting from the  9.45pm/10.30pm  time period  (  to the extent of hiding e fits that would have had that time period as the most crucial of all ) 

Offline Jazzy

Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #39 on: November 02, 2013, 04:11:36 PM »
they were keen for 5 years - even though their own detectives told them it was rubbish.

Now SY have told them it's not an issue in the investigation and have come up with other lines of enquiry. It was one of the few things they did have for 5 years.

Offline Sherlock Holmes

Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #40 on: November 02, 2013, 04:12:26 PM »
Why do you insist on an alibi he hasn't, SH ? Do you know at which exact time the alarm was launched ?
I don't doubt Mr McCann was at the table at this undetermined time though. But the AG wasn't sure and this is why, likely, he did list the "accidental homicide with concealment of body" hypothesis. Will you or not agree the AG thought this couldn't occur without Mr McCann being aware of it ?

This is the bottom line, regardless of exact timings and the machinations of the AG or anyone else.

Offline Luz


Offline Jazzy

Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #42 on: November 02, 2013, 04:15:38 PM »
Since you saw fit to reply, I'll ask you: What agenda?

Offline Apostate

Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #43 on: November 02, 2013, 04:16:48 PM »
Now SY have told them it's not an issue in the investigation and have come up with other lines of enquiry. It was one of the few things they did have for 5 years.

No. They had the e-fits for 5 years - and chose to keep them quiet - along with the rest of the Oakley report.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: No abduction? So what if the e-fits were suppressed for 5 years ?
« Reply #44 on: November 02, 2013, 04:17:04 PM »
Bundleman theory has been 'trashed' by SY
It was "trashed" by Ms Tanner thanks to her implausible invisible presence, then by the PJ because of the implausible presence of two mutually ignorant protagonists on either side of a bedroom door, then by Mr McCann pretending to have been on the other side of the street. However, in spite of all Tannerman's comic adventures, the McCanns sticked to it fearlessly and fearlessly as well ignored Smithman.