Was Mr Smiths claim just pie in the sky after all?

[Lyall]

By whom ?

The only public comments made by any of the family that I know of are the Daily Mirror article in October (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-key-witness-accuses-2433328) where Martin Smith doesn't say anything either way, and Peter Smith briefly speaking in the Sky News programme, also in October (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwVMsDIoULQ 17 mins in).

Are there any more?

[Luz]

I don't believe  the McCanns have fooled SY  I was being ironic...no more than I believe what you post...I believe SY have effectively cleared the McCanns as they are no longer considered to be suspects.

I believe SY knows perfectly what the Mccann did but their assignment is to clear the UK Government - not one minister, but 3. The McCann don't matter at all, what matters are the errors that were committed on their behalf by high members of the Politburo.

Now it is a question of saving face. 

[AnneGuedes]

I believe SY knows perfectly what the Mccann did but their assignment is to clear the UK Government - not one minister, but 3. The McCann don't matter at all, what matters are the errors that were committed on their behalf by high members of the Politburo.

Now it is a question of saving face.

I agree with this.

[Luz]

I agree with this.

Blair, that was already burned by his support to Bush, was with one foot out, and allowed himself to be involved in this because he was working for a place as benemerit. Left a bad inheritance for the feeble Gordon that never stood elections. When the time came to blackmail the President of UE, that was being investigated for corruption in UK, the McCann seemed a good instrument to show who was in charge.
Cameron got arrested by his stupidity on trying to please the MSM - I wonder how he will get this boot off.

[AnneGuedes]

The only public comments made by any of the family that I know of are the Daily Mirror article in October (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-key-witness-accuses-2433328) where Martin Smith doesn't say anything either way, and Peter Smith briefly speaking in the Sky News programme, also in October (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwVMsDIoULQ 17 mins in).

Are there any more?

Thank you very much, Lyall.
Mr Smith changing his mind about the GMClookalike carrier is a rumour then.
He precisely observes that “from our point of view everything else remains the same in relation to what we said to the police and the media at the time. We have nothing more to add.”
Mr Smith is right about the PJ not taking as seriously as they should his second statement, but he's wrong in his explanation for this. Tannerman didn't occult Smithman. It wasn't politically correct to focus on him, at least before a reconstitution took place.

[pathfinder73]

I believe SY knows perfectly what the Mccann did but their assignment is to clear the UK Government - not one minister, but 3. The McCann don't matter at all, what matters are the errors that were committed on their behalf by high members of the Politburo.

Now it is a question of saving face. 

SY good name tarnished and ruined over this case? Top detectives becoming known as a joke! This case is too big and the people expect answers and the TRUTH! Releasing the Smithman Efits and discarding Tannerman on CW means they are moving in the right direction.

[Luz]

SY good name tarnished and ruined over this case? Top detectives becoming known as a joke! This case is too big and the people expect answers and the TRUTH! Releasing the Smithman Efits and discarding Tannerman on CW means they are moving in the right direction.

Are they?

I would say they don't know where they are moving to. They just know they have to move away from the McCann, otherwise it's the British Government that becomes a felon.

[Lyall]

Are they?

I would say they don't know where they are moving to. They just know they have to move away from the McCann, otherwise it's the British Government that becomes a felon.

Lawyers Luz, I think we all forget that lawyers (for the police and all other involved parties) dictate what's said in public. Certainly what was said on Crimewatch anyway because if language used isn't very carefully chosen there could/will be trouble, and careers can/will be broken.

They didn't volunteer for this investigation. We should always remember that.

[pathfinder73]

Are they?

I would say they don't know where they are moving to. They just know they have to move away from the McCann, otherwise it's the British Government that becomes a felon.

I would say from CW that they do know which way they are moving. Jill Renwick being a neighbour to Gordon Brown's brother and telling him about Madeleine is going to bring down the Government? Gordon Brown, Cherie Blair giving the McCann's preferential treatment is going to bring down the Government? Please explain how is it going to bring down the government? Mind you that wouldn't be a bad thing lol.

[AnneGuedes]

Lawyers Luz, I think we all forget that lawyers (for the police and all other involved parties) dictate what's said in public. Certainly what was said on Crimewatch anyway because if language used isn't very carefully chosen there could/will be trouble, and careers can/will be broken.

They didn't volunteer for this investigation. We should always remember that.

Yes, but could they refuse ?
Anyhow I think they must feel confortable checking all kinds of burglars, gypsies and paedophiles. At least they will be able to say they have followed and eliminated all still warm leads.

[Carana]

Are they?

I would say they don't know where they are moving to. They just know they have to move away from the McCann, otherwise it's the British Government that becomes a felon.

Why would the British Government (more than one in fact) become a felon?

[Lyall]

Yes, but could they refuse ?
Anyhow I think they must feel confortable checking all kinds of burglars, gypsies and paedophiles. At least they will be able to say they have followed and eliminated all still warm leads.

No they couldn't refuse. I agree with you, they will investigate anything that doesn't go anywhere near the conclusion of the investigation in 2008. To do anything else would be disastrous if you were unable to take it to a court, you'd be stuck in no man's land in the sights of the machine guns.

[AnneGuedes]

No they couldn't refuse. I agree with you, they will investigate anything that doesn't go anywhere near the conclusion of the investigation in 2008. To do anything else would be disastrous if you were unable to take it to a court, you'd be stuck in no man's land in the sights of the machine guns.

Sure. No man's land would be unbearable.
CW's Smithman might have been the unique possible attempt by DCI Redwood to find and eliminate a father and child couple.
He will not go further, as he knows where going further would lead him to.

[Estuarine]

Why would the British Government (more than one in fact) become a felon?

You have to believe in conspiracy theories to work that out. Believing in Father Christmas, Easter Bunnies, Boy Wizards and 'Obbits probably helps too. Must dash; just off to feed me Unicorn 

[Sherlock Holmes]

SY good name tarnished and ruined over this case? Top detectives becoming known as a joke! This case is too big and the people expect answers and the TRUTH! Releasing the Smithman Efits and discarding Tannerman on CW means they are moving in the right direction.

Moving in the direction of a sighting of a man with a young girl, corroborated in some detail by several witnesses, at a time when the Tapas nine were all in the Ocean Club.