The Smith sighting revisited.

[misty]

No way have the landline phone records of OC reception, and GNR Lagos station. been doctored.
But lets imagine that the network clock of the landline phone company was say 30 minutes fast.
That would mean that in the records for OC reception landline, and in the seperate records for GNR Lagos station, (both reliant on the same network clock) the calls listed as 2241 and 2252 would have really been at 2211 and 2222 (hypothetical example).

I'd have a lot of trouble believing that.
The receptionist certainly required further grilling for his role in the delayed phone call - and what else he was doing between 9 & 10.30pm.

[pathfinder73]

This all proves that human memory cannot be relied upon 100%, so to believe that only Aoife had a totally accurate recollection is improbable.
 I am puzzled, though,  that so many OC staff put their timelines  much earlier than the computerised data confirms. You don't think it has been doctored?

Not everyone was paying close attention to their watch that night like Gerry. We have a good idea Aoife was right on times due to her statement and receipt times to back it up.

[pegasus]

I'd have a lot of trouble believing that.
The receptionist certainly required further grilling for his role in the delayed phone call - and what else he was doing between 9 & 10.30pm.

It would have made sense to ask him - "when a staffmember called you and you called the GNR, was that the very first time you heard of the missing child, or did someone walk in before that and report it to you?".

I think the last check and the alarm are likely to be earlier than commonly assumed.,And the Smith sighting is likely to be later than commonly assumed. It requires a very rushed Kelly visit to make the sighting so early as 10pm. They had just spent almost 2 hours at Dolphin, so I expect they would have stayed about half an hour at Kelly after getting their drinks at 21:39 , which would make the sighting about 22:15.

[pathfinder73]

It would have made sense to ask him - "when a staffmember called you and you called the GNR, was that the very first time you heard of the missing child, or did someone walk in before that and report it to you?".

I think the last check and the alarm are likely to be earlier than commonly assumed.,And the Smith sighting is likely to be later than commonly assumed. It requires a very rushed Kelly visit to make the sighting so early as 10pm. They had just spent almost 2 hours at Dolphin, so I expect they would have stayed about half an hour at Kelly after getting their drinks at 21:39 , which would make the sighting about 22:15.

Dolphin is next to Kelly's Bar so it would only take a minute to get there. There's 12 minutes between receipt times 9:27 & 9:39. I think they would be at Kelly's about 9:30 as Aoife said in her statement.

[misty]

It would have made sense to ask him - "when a staffmember called you and you called the GNR, was that the very first time you heard of the missing child, or did someone walk in before that and report it to you?".

I think the last check and the alarm are likely to be earlier than commonly assumed.,And the Smith sighting is likely to be later than commonly assumed. It requires a very rushed Kelly visit to make the sighting so early as 10pm. They had just spent almost 2 hours at Dolphin, so I expect they would have stayed about half an hour at Kelly after getting their drinks at 21:39 , which would make the sighting about 22:15.

Bearing in mind the mobilisation of all the OC staff/nannies, is it reasonable to assume that it was nearly half an hour before anyone at all went to reception?
You know my views on Smithman so the time of the sighting is irrelevant to me.

[misty]

Dolphin is next to Kelly's Bar so it would only take a minute to get there. There's 12 minutes between receipt times 9:27 & 9:39. I think they would be at Kelly's about 9:30 as Aoife said in her statement.

The Irish do like to talk!
You're not taking into consideration that some of them probably needed to visit the restroom before adjourning to the pub.

[pegasus]

Bearing in mind the mobilisation of all the OC staff/nannies, is it reasonable to assume that it was nearly half an hour before anyone at all went to reception?
You know my views on Smithman so the time of the sighting is irrelevant to me.

The first staff to hear that a child was missing were nannies CP and JW and AT.
They were working at the evening creche when a mum came in to collect her child and said she had just passed a man searching for a missing child.
They started the chains of phonecalls which notified other the numerous staff.
Now it is interesting to note that evening creche is very close to 24 hour reception.
Possibly even directly one floor above it.
(I am not sure whether to get to/from evening creche you walk past reception desk, or whether they have seperate doors).

And back to the Smith sighting, I too think the Sept identification by M Smith is incorrect.

[pathfinder73]

The Irish do like to talk!
You're not taking into consideration that some of them probably needed to visit the restroom before adjourning to the pub.

Yes with small children it would take longer - pick a table, choose drinks for everyone then order so that could take 5-10 minutes. But they would still be arriving at Kelly's around 9:30.

[pegasus]

Dolphin is next to Kelly's Bar so it would only take a minute to get there. There's 12 minutes between receipt times 9:27 & 9:39. I think they would be at Kelly's about 9:30 as Aoife said in her statement.

I have seen large groups leaving restaurants. One of them pays the bill, either at the table or at the desk, and then they all start getting up and then one or more decide to visit the loo, it can be easily be ten minutes before they are actually all out the door. People who have spent 1 hour 57minutes over a meal are not going to rush to evacuate the restuarant, they do so slowly.
The timing you propose has that whole process, plus the walk to Kellys, taking under 3 minutes, but then you have the lady in Kellys, where there was absolutely no queue and no other customers present, taking 9 minutes to serve them drinks? 

[misty]

The first staff to hear that a child was missing were nannies CP and JW and AT.
They were working at the evening creche when a mum came in to collect her child and said she had just passed a man searching for a missing child.
They started the chains of phonecalls which notified other the numerous staff.
Now it is interesting to note that evening creche is very close to 24 hour reception.
Possibly even directly one floor above it.
(I am not sure whether to get to/from evening creche you walk past reception desk, or whether they have seperate doors).

And back to the Smith sighting, I too think the Sept identification by M Smith is incorrect.

The 3 nannies all state that they became aware of the disappearance between 10 & 10.15.
The waiter Ricardo Oliveira states that the diners were all missing, bar Dianne, from the dining table, between 2145 & 2200hrs
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RICARDO-A-D-L-OLIVEIRA.htm

I'm having a little trouble finding out who Joe is, as mentioned in Ricardo's statement, who seemed to be under the impression that Ricardo had phoned reception about the disappearance.
Is it really possible that absolutely none of the OC staff took responsibility for ensuring the police were called? Maybe the receptionist was just too busy booking in new arrivals.........but then, he wasn't asked what he was doing or who else was hanging around reception that night.

[colombosstogey]

....get real pathfinder, I am not a pro or a con of the case. I am in it to find the truth. Why does it have to be 10pm? What are you trying to PROVE? You are convinced a 12 year old girl is ACCURATE in timings. Jeez now that is BS. I have had grandchildren at 12 years old who have no clue as to what time it is, and quite a few cant even read the time lol....unless its on their latest gadgets. No I certainly would not expect a 12 year old to be so accurate.

Your just trying to match it to a possibility it being ...... ........ is that it?

I actually think the smith man does exist but around 10.20.

We can all sit here on our computers working out times, but no one is accurate on times when you are on holiday and this statement wasnt even made straight away, so time can change in your mind PERCEPTION.

I am not quite sure why you are so hung ho on it being IMPOSSIBLE to be around 10.15/20.

I dont for one minute think it was ...... anyway. From the McCann files.......

'Further on this issue, the testimony of MARTIN SMITH was considered, pages 1606 and following, reporting the sighting of an individual carrying a child, in one of the streets that lead to the beach. It was said that the child could be MADELEINE McCANN, although it was never peremptorily stated.

Some time later, the witness alleged that, by its stance, the individual who carried the child could be GERALD McCANN, which was concluded when he saw him descending the stairs from an airplane, pages 2871, 3991 and following and 4135 and following. It was established that at the time that was being mentioned, GERALD McCANN was sitting at the table, in the Tapas Restaurant.'

.........................................................................

So he never actually saw this guys face, they all stated that:

As they walk, they pass a man carrying a child in his arms. The man averts his eyes from them to signal that he does not wish to speak.

Its dark they cannot determine his face.....

The only reason why it looked like Gerry McCann was because of the way he was walking down the airplane carrying his son.....

I am not going to pad things out to suit the fact it might be Mr McCann. It needs to be truth and logical.

Why would he be moving his daughter at 10pm through lit streets, no one else saw him.....

I think there was someone carrying a child, and most people do carry children that way when they are alseep.

As no one came forward who could it be?

Mr Innocent but later and that is why he never came forward because the timing was wrong.
Or Mr Sinister, BUT if he had abducted the child as late as say 9.45, then why walk through Prai Da Lus.

I am leaning more towards Mr Smithman maybe being Mr Innocent....

No I cant see the point of taking the child towards the beach....when a. The McCanns could have simply not cried foul so early and left it later.....or

She was taken at 9.45 say and the perv moved her through the car park and out towards the lagos road and a car waiting.

Either way we know the child is missing.

BUT you cant stick with timings we all know that witness statements can be so wrong, and this was not immediate was it. Wasnt it two weeks later and then four months later?

ALSO ITS ODD ISNT IT. Mr Smiths witness statement.

After leaving the bar, he travelled in the opposite direction and reached a set of stairs which gave access to Rua 25 de Abril (25th of April Street). On this artery they followed a second street, parallel to Rua 1 de Maio (1st of May Street) whose name he does not remember. He was heading toward his apartment (Estrela da Luz complex) which is located a little above the street that crosses the primary school.

As he reached this artery, he crossed an individual holding a child. He notes that it is normal to see people carrying children, especially during the holiday season. This individual was walking the downward path, in the opposite direction. He is not aware where this person was headed. He only saw him as they passed each other. He assumed it was a father and daughter and thought nothing more of it. So he hardly took any notice of him in fact almost ignored the fact as it was usual to see people wandering that particular street with sleeping kids.......

• Urged, states that when he passed this individual, it must have been around 22H00. He did not know at the time that a child had disappeared. He only became aware of the disappearance of the child the next morning, from his daughter in Ireland. She had sent him a message or called him regarding what had happened. At this point he thought that MADELEINE could have been the child he saw with the individual.

.......................

So from taking no notice to a man carrying a child, the perception now is to fit it with this scenario.

AT THIS POINT HE THOUGHT THAT MADELEINE COULD HAVE BEEN THE CHILD HE SAW WITH THE INDIVIDUAL....

HE THOUGHT.

So he had no interest in the sighting so his brain would not have even bothered to take notes of clothing etc, then after finding a child missing etc, his brain is now active and matching it to the childs disappearance....

...................................

[colombosstogey]

The idea that ...... went dashing off to move the body at around the time the alarm was raised is just too daft for words IMO.

How could he know beforehand what time the police were going to arrive?  It could have been 5 minutes after the alarm was raised  for all he knew.  How did he know that some unrelated person would not ring the police on their mobiles as soon as Kate raised the alarm.

No sane person would devise a plan which invoved (a)  having no idea where they would be when the police arrived, (b)  having no idea how long they would be gone - and (c) having no idea how many people would be around to see them - on the way there or on the way back.   
 
This 'theory' is just another example of the misuse of hindsight  IMO.      Facts which are now known but which could not possibly have been known by GM at the time are being used.

BENICE, please do not collapse or faint, but I actually agree with you on this issue lol....Yeh i know a bit shocking .........

BUT it doesnt make sense.

They could even have left the discovery until morning. Shout abduction foul play etc, window open child gone. During the night then take the childs body away that would make more sense to me and it would work too.

Its all toooooooooo rushed IMHO, trying to fit this sighting.

I knew the tanner sighting was BOGUS, and this Smith man doesnt sit well with me either, not at 10pm. Later yes it could be, but not at 10pm....really doesnt make sense.....

[Mr Gray]

BENICE, please do not collapse or faint, but I actually agree with you on this issue lol....Yeh i know a bit shocking .........

BUT it doesnt make sense.

They could even have left the discovery until morning. Shout abduction foul play etc, window open child gone. During the night then take the childs body away that would make more sense to me and it would work too.

Its all toooooooooo rushed IMHO, trying to fit this sighting.

I knew the tanner sighting was BOGUS, and this Smith man doesnt sit well with me either, not at 10pm. Later yes it could be, but not at 10pm....really doesnt make sense.....

the fact that they could have waited till morning is one of the reasons that I don't believe in the accident cover up.
Wake up in the morning...Maddie gone window open...no criticism for neglect...would have made far more sense .

[Benice]

BENICE, please do not collapse or faint, but I actually agree with you on this issue lol....Yeh i know a bit shocking .........

BUT it doesnt make sense.

They could even have left the discovery until morning. Shout abduction foul play etc, window open child gone. During the night then take the childs body away that would make more sense to me and it would work too.

Its all toooooooooo rushed IMHO, trying to fit this sighting.

I knew the tanner sighting was BOGUS, and this Smith man doesnt sit well with me either, not at 10pm. Later yes it could be, but not at 10pm....really doesnt make sense.....

Gosh - pass me the Smelling Salts!  LOL.

I also believe that if it was 'staged' - then no way would they have chosen 10 o'clock at night to begin 'proceedings' - when it's so glaringly obvious  that a much simpler and far more 'beneficial' plan would be to wait until the following morning.     They would have to be simpletons not to have realised that IMO. 

[stephen25000]

Would Madeleine have 'disappeared' if one or more other parents had been there, a babysitter had been present, etc.   ?