The Sunday Times Apologises...yet e-fits withheld from public view for 5 years?

[Mr Gray]

Isn't suppressed the direct opposite of promoted?

Not in my book

[Lyall]

The PJ and the Leicestershire force also ' suppressed' this information then, by that definition. Look, the McCanns passed it to the authorities in two countries. Claiming the McCanns suppressed the information is clearly spin.

In the absence of explanation of what happened between 2008 and October 2009, their actions appear to show a lack of urgency. That's the point.

[Mr Gray]

The PJ and the Leicestershire force also ' suppressed' this information then, by that definition. Look, the McCanns passed it to the authorities in two countries. Claiming the McCanns suppressed the information is clearly spin.

its more than spin its wrong

[Mr Gray]

In the absence of explanation of what happened between 2008 and October 2009, their actions appear to show a lack of urgency. That's the point.

they were handed to the police...they were considered unimportant because the pj did not trace tannerman as sy did

[Lyall]

they were handed to the police...they were considered unimportant because the pj did not trace tannerman as sy did

So unimportant that Cutting Edge claimed the two men could be one and the same

[Lyall]

We know they didn't want to mention the 10pm sighting, davel. But they eventually did in Cutting Edge, claimed the two men could be the same and yet didn't use the efits available when no efit existed for 9.15 man.

Explain that >@@(*&)

[sadie]

We know they didn't want to mention the 10pm sighting, davel. But they eventually did in Cutting Edge, claimed the two men could be the same and yet didn't use the efits available when no efit existed for 9.15 man.

Explain that >@@(*&)

One doesn't irrevocably associate events, if one has no proof.

Otherwise a myth becomes established. 

Better to leave it open, with obvious probable connections than to cement the two together .

[Lyall]

One doesn't irrevocably associate events, if one has no proof.

Otherwise a myth becomes established. 

Better to leave it open, with obvious probable connections than to cement the two together .

There's logic there... if you're not in any hurry. But it doesn't make sense for the parents of a child who is missing and who is they say alive and findable. You surely show some urgency. They didn't.

Unless there's another reason why the efits weren't used that they won't or can't tell us.

[Mr Gray]

So unimportant that Cutting Edge claimed the two men could be one and the same

they were given to the pj...so not supressed...supressed means they were deliberately hidden...who took the decision not to publish them and why...anyone KNOW the answer

[pathfinder73]

Tannerman was not walking through the streets with Madeleine in his arms for 45 minutes when spotted by the Smith family. There's two possibilities 1. Not Madeleine 2. Hidden and retrieved 45 minutes later. I believe number 2 happened (hidden and later retrieved) by Smithman to fool everyone but not by Tannerman going in that direction.

[Victoria]

Tannerman was not walking through the streets with Madeleine in his arms for 45 minutes when spotted by the Smith family. There's two possibilities 1. Not Madeleine 2. Hidden and retrieved 45 minutes later. I believe number 2 happened (hidden and later retrieved) by Smithman to fool everyone but not by Tannerman going in that direction.

Hidden and retrieved later to 'fool everyone'? I wouldn't find that believable in a daytime TV crime show let alone real life. And to fool who, exactly? We are frequently told the streets were practically deserted. Was this person, in your opinion, simply wandering around carrying a corpse for as long as it took for him to be spotted? And presumably, whilst he wanted to be spotted to 'fool everyone' he didn't want to be recognised. So how does that work?

[pathfinder73]

A simple simulated abduction scenario - Madeleine couldn't be in the apartment when the alarm was raised so she was moved and hidden earlier. It's quite simple. He retrieved her later and was seen by the Smith family at 10pm.

[Victoria]

A simple simulated abduction scenario - Madeleine couldn't be in the apartment when the alarm was raised so she was moved and hidden earlier. It's quite simple. He retrieved her later and was seen by the Smith family at 10pm.

It's not simple though, is it. It's massively over complicated, involves huge risk, and relies on a large number of unproven assumptions. It's nonsense, putting it kindly.

[Wonderfulspam]

It's not simple though, is it. It's massively over complicated, involves huge risk, and relies on a large number of unproven assumptions. It's nonsense, putting it kindly.

That sounds like a description of any of those ludicrous abduction scenarios that have been guffed out in here.
2 abductors & getaway cars & pervy creepy paedophiles or dead black ex heroin addicts stealing Maddie for 5 euros before dying in a tragic farmyard accident.

[pathfinder73]

It's not simple though, is it. It's massively over complicated, involves huge risk, and relies on a large number of unproven assumptions. It's nonsense, putting it kindly.

I disagree. Anyone (or not anyone) could conceal a body in a bag, take it out of the apartment when it's dark and quiet and hide the body in the bottom of a wheelie bin and bring the bag back to the apartment. Then go back to the bin in the first searches and retrieve the body and be seen by eye witnesses. Only Smithman would know where she was hidden and why he retrieved her later.