So where was Smithman going to that night?

[pegasus]

Pegasus, I have much respect for your logic, but here, imo, your thought processes are flawed.


To compare the two:
Descending the steps from the aircraft to walking down the street the form of motion and dangers must be similar ... and they aren't. 

Two utterly different sorts of motion, one down steep steps, the other on a steady slope. 
Two utterly different sorts of dangers.

In the case of Gerry descending the steps of the aircraft, of course HE MUST LOOK DOWN, and of course HE MUST HOLD HIS SLEEPING SON IN THAT MANNER with a hand free in case he needs to grab the rail or further support his son.

In the case of Smithman he was walking along a paved roadway, with no overt danger, so he had no real reason to look down.  Seems he looked down cos he didn't want his face to be seen.  No other reason that I can think of..

Both were carrying their child in a manner thta we all do when they are sleeping, with the head over their shoulder and their breathing apparatus, mouth and nose, free to do the job necessary.    Also an easy way of carrying with the weight of the child mainly distributed over the carriers shoulder and body, rather than by his arms.

This is the way we all carry our sleeping children for a distance.  Tbh, it is potty to suggest otherwise.


No disrespect, Pegasus, but I think that your wishes for this man to be Gerry have overuled your normal analyses and perception

You have misunderstood my post completely. How much more clearly can I say this? Identification by style of carrying is not possible. The identification by Mr Smith was incorrect. 

[sadie]

You have misunderstood my post completely. How much more clearly can I say this? Identification by style of carrying is not possible. The identification by Mr Smith was incorrect.

Oh Sorry Pegasus.

I should have known better, you usually get it right 

[Carana]

If there was a homicide, where is the body?

That was what we were going to establish next. On the day that I was removed, I was carrying out diligences for a fundamental witness to come to Portugal. It was necessary for the PJ to pay for the trip, to arrange for lodging, and that was being taken care of. But then the important witness never came to Portugal and was never heard.

    
Gonçalo Amaral interviewed by Expresso, 04 July 2008
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id139.html

Is he referring to Martin Smith? If so, was he not interested in the views of the other members of the family?

[Victoria]

If there was a homicide, where is the body?

That was what we were going to establish next. On the day that I was removed, I was carrying out diligences for a fundamental witness to come to Portugal. It was necessary for the PJ to pay for the trip, to arrange for lodging, and that was being taken care of. But then the important witness never came to Portugal and was never heard.

    
Gonçalo Amaral interviewed by Expresso, 04 July 2008
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id139.html

Is he referring to Martin Smith? If so, was he not interested in the views of the other members of the family?

Pretty likely he was referring to Smith. As for not bothering with the rest of the Smith family, well they weren't saying what he wanted to hear so why would he bother listening to them? We all know what his approach to police work was like.

[Carana]

Smithman could simply be another innocent dad carrying his child home. For all anyone knows, he (or anyone else at home) could have been asked by the GNR when they did their house checks right at the beginning if he'd seen anything suspicious that evening. The answer would be no if he hadn't seen anyone else carrying a child or behaving suspiciously.

Tannerman was walking in a different direction and press allegations against Murat might have made him think they'd got their man and were about to charge him at any moment. Then there was a spate of Smithman articles, but the press seemed to have decided that that may have been Murat (cf Martin Smith allegedly denying that it was him), then there were all the allegations that it was Gerry and the McCanns were going to be charged at any moment. So there's still no reason to come forward... and the fear of being dragged into a media circus might be another. Or he may have simply moved away since then and not followed the saga.

Even today, depending on how the press present the police interest in the e-fits, it may sound as if he might suddenly be treated as a suspect (by the media, if not by the police), or be in trouble if he or anyone else associated with him was in an irregular situation at the time for some reason.

And then there's Amaral still plugging the Smithman-was-Gerry show on CMTV.

All in all, not very inviting to come forward, is it?

[pegasus]

Please anyone got a source for PJ having put ads in local papers re smithman? Or an image of the ad?

[John]

According to Amaral, arrangements had been made to bring the Smiths back to Praia da Luz for a formal identification of Gerry McCann after they contacted the Irish police (Garda) following the McCanns return to the UK. 

Amaral - The Truth of the Lie
"By means of televised images, certainly - direct confrontation being impossible - and possibly proceed to a reconstruction of the events of May 3rd.  The National Director of the Judiciary police agrees, the process is set in motion, all the details are sorted out; all that remains is to choose the hotel where they will be put up.  But the Smiths were never to come back to Portugal. After my departure the PJ were to change their minds. They asked the Irish police to continue with interviewing the witness."

[Silkywhiskers]

Amaral deserves a medal for persisting in his quest for the truth.

He's lost everything, including half his body weight.

He is a hero and he will be publicly vindicated.

[Brietta]

It's also scientifically impossible to produce a facial efit when you haven't seen someone's face. Yet, miraculously, it seems the Irish can defy science.

Jane Tanner was unable to describe the face of the person she witnessed for the simple reason that she did not see it. 

I find it extraordinary that such detailed efits are alleged to have been provided by witnesses who described the person they saw as having his head down which imo was to avoid facial identification. 

Maybe the Mr Halligen will shed some light on the technique used as I am sure this new branch of science will be very useful for law enforcement.

[Silkywhiskers]

Jane Tanner was unable to describe the face of the person she witnessed for the simple reason that she did not see it. 

I find it extraordinary that such detailed efits are alleged to have been provided by witnesses who described the person they saw as having his head down which imo was to avoid facial identification. 

Maybe the Mr Halligen will shed some light on the technique used as I am sure this new branch of science will be very useful for law enforcement.

It doesn't really matter who you insult, Scotland Yard have specifically told us these efits are THE SUSPECT.

[Victoria]

It doesn't really matter who you insult, Scotland Yard have specifically told us these efits are THE SUSPECT.

Um...link?

[Mr Gray]

It doesn't really matter who you insult, Scotland Yard have specifically told us these efits are THE SUSPECT.

Cant you get anything right...Redwood has said that smithman may be an innocent tourist

[Silkywhiskers]

Cant you get anything right...Redwood has said that smithman may be an innocent tourist

But he MAY NOT be.......................

That is what "may" means.

It means - MAYBE.

Not fact, and not to be interpreted as fact.

[jassi]

And, to date, no one has come forward claiming to be this innocent tourist.

[pegasus]

If SY were led to the mound site by the Smith sighting, SY must be recognising the possibility of a direction change soon after the sighting.
Smithman was seen by the witnesses heading south or east. To get to the mound area he would need to change direction and go west.