Kate McCann admits in her book that private criminal investigations in Portugal were illegal.

[Angelo222]

October 2009 is right (for when the McCanns passed the e-fits to the Met.)

We know that at the end of January 2008, Martin Smith had been approached by Brian Kennedy to produce an e-fit, but refused.

It is common sense that all the time he thought the man he and his family saw was Gerry, he would refuse.

Why did he change his mind?

And who is supposed to have 'hidden' what for 5 years?

If, indeed, the Smiths saw Madeleine's abductor, that was not considered a strong enough lead to warrant continuation of  the investigation?

The McCanns could not, in all conscience, publicise, quite possibly, an e-fit of Madeleine's abductor other than in the context of a live and on-going police enquiry.

The Times made a compete crock of the original story, if the e-fits were commissioned by latest early 2008 then they were held back from the police for nearly two years.

Bottom line is the McCanns promoted the wrong man as the abductor and so wasted years before Redwood came along and corrected them.  That meant then that Redwood agreed with Amaral as far as the carriers were concerned.  Both investigators are now retired!

[ferryman]

The Times made a compete crock of the original story, if the e-fits were commissioned by latest early 2008 then they were held back from the police for nearly two years.

Nothing was 'held back'.

A live and on-going police enquiry (alone) was needed to publicise the e-fit of (possibly) Madeleine's abductor.

[Brietta]

Statement made 12th September 2007

I am the above named person and I live at an address know to Police. In early May 2007 myself and my wife were on holiday in Portugal. I have already provided a witness statement in relation to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. I would like to add the following;

The events of the past week or so, with the McCanns being very much in the news, have triggered my memory in relation to the incident.

In my original statement I described a distressed female who ran down a road towards a white van I had described.

Having viewed recent news footage of Mrs McCann I am now almost certain that she is the female I described as being in a distressed state. I say this because of her slight build, high cheekbones and her eyes and hairstyle.

I've agonised for days over whether or not to contact the police about this because it is a terrible thing to accuse somebody of. It had just not crossed my mind that the child?s parents could in some way be involved in her disappearance.

I have watched a good deal of news coverage about the McCanns over the past week or so. Another thing which has played on my mind is the coverage of Mr McCann walking off the aeroplane holding one of his young children. The way he was holding the child over his left shoulder reminded me of the man carrying the child from the white van in Portugal.

Although I could not describe the male I'd seen in Portugal because he had his back to me, it was the particular way Mr. McCann held the child that made me think. He held the child over his left shoulder with his left arm supporting the child?s weight.
Richard McMcCluskey

Is saying that after seeing the McCanns on the news on 9th Sept when they returned to UK he has not slept and is worried sick. He states he was watching the 10 PM on BBC and saw the McCanns getting off the plane and coming down the steps. He states it was like watching an action replay of the night he saw the male carrying the child back in Portugal. He states the way Gerry was carrying his twin triggered something in his head. It was exactly the same way and look of the male seen the night Maddie went missing . He also watched ITV news and Sky news and inferred it looked like the same person both times carrying the children.
Martin Smith

Mr McCluskey's recollection was entirely flawed ... as was Mr Smith's; which was precisely why the additional statement made by Mr McCluskey was disregarded by the Policia Judiciaria - it was also why the PJ disregarded Mr Smith's addition to his statement.

That Mr Smith's erroneous statement has been worked into the litany used to justify scepticism of the Drs McCann has been a bit of a mystery to me.  Almost as big a mystery as the criticism directed at them for being able to use private investigators in the search for their daughter, particularly as the information uncovered in this way was sent to the Policia Judiciaria as the investigative authority.

[stephen25000]

Nothing was 'held back'.

A live and on-going police enquiry (alone) was needed to publicise the e-fit of (possibly) Madeleine's abductor.

Of course they were held back.

You can't rewrite  history.

[ferryman]

Of course they were held back.

You can't rewrite  history.

I'm not trying to ....

[ferryman]

And a further (and blindingly obvious) question: in October 2009, the police (English and Portuguese) were in possession of the efits.

Yet they chose to wait until the Crimewatch programme to release it publicly.

So why does anyone harangue the McCanns?

[stephen25000]

And a further (and blindingly obvious) question: in October 2009, the police (English and Portuguese) were in possession of the efits.

Yet they chose to wait until the Crimewatch programme to release it publicly.

So why does anyone harangue the McCanns?

May the 3 rd 2007.

[Brietta]

May the 3 rd 2007.

  ... and that helps Madeleine McCann ... how ?????

[carlymichelle]

  ... and that helps Madeleine McCann ... how ?????

 nothing can help maddie now  imo

[ShiningInLuz]

Nothing was 'held back'.

A live and on-going police enquiry (alone) was needed to publicise the e-fit of (possibly) Madeleine's abductor.

You've lost me on this.  Kate's book covers 8 suspicious sightings that need to be clarified, and whacks out e-fits for 7, but not for the Smithman one?

If she didn't have the right to publicise Smithman (and I can't see why not), how did she get the right to publicise the other e-fits?

Please enlighten me.

[ferryman]

You've lost me on this.  Kate's book covers 8 suspicious sightings that need to be clarified, and whacks out e-fits for 7, but not for the Smithman one?

If she didn't have the right to publicise Smithman (and I can't see why not), how did she get the right to publicise the other e-fits?

Please enlighten me.

I have tried.

I will try again.

Succinctly, the Smiths might have seen Madeleine's abductor.  No other citing comes close to that.

It needed a police enquiry to release.

That is why the police themselves kept hold of it for a long while after being in possession of the efits until choosing the moment of the Crimewatch programme to release it.

The Crimewatch programme was in October 2013

The police had the efits in August 2011.

So, if you like, why did the police withhold the efits for over 2 years?

[Carana]

You've lost me on this.  Kate's book covers 8 suspicious sightings that need to be clarified, and whacks out e-fits for 7, but not for the Smithman one?

If she didn't have the right to publicise Smithman (and I can't see why not), how did she get the right to publicise the other e-fits?

Please enlighten me.

She did mention the similarities between the two sightings.

What is not known is whether there was a legal reason why the Smith efits couldn't be published. There was a mention of an ongoing legal dispute with Oakley and co., and it's not clear exactly what that entailed.

[sadie]

No, not in my opinion but fact.  We all know what happened to little Bushra whose parents were made to look like child traffickers. We know that Martin Smith was pressurised to tone down his identification of Gerry McCann. We know there were false sightings reported in order to justify the huge sums being paid to PI's.

All of it was one big fat lie. I won't even mention the conspiracy to destroy the lead detective Amaral which was funded by M3 and fronted by Marcos Correia.  All of which was in turn paid for by Kennedy and the McCanns on the pretence they were searching for Madeleine.  They must think were stupid or all least f...ing tossers to have swallowed such total crap.

Why has my response to this along with every single post I made since I got up this morning been removed?

Surely you are not still at your old game of removing my posts every time I beat you in discussion?

That's the way to win arguments Angelo; just blank out the oppositions responses especially if is sadies response.  You will win everything then

[ShiningInLuz]

I have tried.

I will try again.

Succinctly, the Smiths might have seen Madeleine's abductor.  No other citing comes close to that.

It needed a police enquiry to release.

That is why the police themselves kept hold of it for a long while after being in possession of the efits until choosing the moment of the Crimewatch programme to release it.

The Crimewatch programme was in October 2013

The police had the efits in August 2011.

So, if you like, why did the police withhold the efits for over 2 years?

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

On this point, it looks like we are going to differ.  The non-publication of the e-fit whilst describing the man in as much detail as possible seems like a missed opportunity.

The man might well have read Kate's book, come forward, cleared himself and that would have been a major step forward.  Ditto, all the others were given the chance to come forward, even if none seems to have taken it, not even Crècheman.

Is it still the case these e-fits are still not in the Portuguese page of the Find Madeleine site?

Turning to your question re why the police did not publish them.  If you mean the PJ, they are subject to the laws of Portugal, and there is no equivalent of Crimewatch here, or appeals by the PJ for information in such a manner.

If you mean OG, it is clear they went through a massive logistical exercise before getting to Crimewatch.  I assume there was a lot of dancing around when OG raised the public appeal approach, given they depend on Portuguese co-operation.

I can't remember OG rushing anything out, though I wasn't interested in the case at the time.

Finally, although Crimewatch as a vehicle was clearly in place and could be used fairly quickly in UK cases, the filming for this one required a TV crew to operate in Luz.  I'd bet there was more negotiation over that.

[Brietta]

Thank you for taking the time to reply.

On this point, it looks like we are going to differ.  The non-publication of the e-fit whilst describing the man in as much detail as possible seems like a missed opportunity.

The man might well have read Kate's book, come forward, cleared himself and that would have been a major step forward.  Ditto, all the others were given the chance to come forward, even if none seems to have taken it, not even Crècheman.

Is it still the case these e-fits are still not in the Portuguese page of the Find Madeleine site?

Turning to your question re why the police did not publish them.  If you mean the PJ, they are subject to the laws of Portugal, and there is no equivalent of Crimewatch here, or appeals by the PJ for information in such a manner.

If you mean OG, it is clear they went through a massive logistical exercise before getting to Crimewatch.  I assume there was a lot of dancing around when OG raised the public appeal approach, given they depend on Portuguese co-operation.

I can't remember OG rushing anything out, though I wasn't interested in the case at the time.

Finally, although Crimewatch as a vehicle was clearly in place and could be used fairly quickly in UK cases, the filming for this one required a TV crew to operate in Luz.  I'd bet there was more negotiation over that.

I found this when I was looking for something entirely different and thought it might lead to the explanation of why the Times paid up and apologised in recognition that they had wronged the McCanns.

It rather suggests to me that the images promoted in the Crimewatch appeal actually may have more to do with HOLMES than PIs.



New photo clue to Madeleine McCann case

DETECTIVES are using the latest computer technology to try to create a new image of a “prime suspect” who might have been involved in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

By JAMES MURRAY
PUBLISHED: 00:00, Sun, Mar 11, 2012


They are also working on a “computerised reconstruction” of the night she disappeared by putting thousands of pieces of information into the police Holmes computer.

The developments come at a ­significant time with the Policia Judiciaria in Portugal announcing it has a cold case team working on the investigation in Porto, north Portugal.

The Portuguese officers will work closely with the Scotland Yard detectives and will have “primacy” in the investigation.

The Sunday Express understands the Yard team have been examining all photofits, e-fits and drawings of people suspected of being involved in the disappearance of three-year-old Madeleine from an apartment in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz on May 3, 2007. One of the best known drawings was based on a description given by a friend of Madeleine’s parents, Gerry and Kate. Jane Tanner claimed she saw a man carrying a child in his arms but did not get a good look at his face.

Other images were created from witnesses who saw people acting suspiciously in the vicinity around the time of the crime.

Irishman Martin Smith and members of his family saw a man carrying a child in his arms at about 10pm, about 45 minutes after the Tanner sighting. However, he was not asked to help produce a photofit. The Met refuses to discuss the details but it is expected that officers will approach Mr Smith and his family for help. Yard experts are looking at ways of improving the images to end with one pristine likeness of the “suspect”.

Officers are using the Home Office Large Major Enquiry System for computer logging of all relevant information and have tailored it to help create what is described as a “computer reconstruction” of the key events of the night of May 3.

It is hoped that eventually there will be an almost minute by minute account, which will assist officers.

The Yard launched its review last year after Kate and Gerry McCann appealed directly to David Cameron. Officers have visited Portugal several times and are said to have a good relationship with their Portuguese counterparts.

PJ deputy chief Pedro do Carmo said: ‘‘The Porto team is very experienced in these cases.”

Kate and Gerry, of Rothley, Leicestershire, hope the review will lead to a full scale reopening of the case.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/307369/New-photo-clue-to-Madeleine-McCann-case