If she was carried out of 5a rather than wandering out, the use of a get-away-car is an almost certainty. What worries me about the Smith sighting though is the long sleeve pyjamas since Madeleine was wearing short sleeved pj's when she went to bed. In my opinion, the Smiths sighting is a red herring.
In view of what we know about the fallibility of memory - I don't think a couple of discrepancies would negate the large amount of 'similarities' in the descriptions given. It would be a miracle IMO if both descriptions had been identical in every detail. Short sleeves or mid length sleeves later recalled by one witness as being long sleeves - is a minor discrepancy IMO. The fact that both parties saw a child with bare feet, not covered by anything and possibly wearing pajamas being carried by a man who neither party thought looked like a tourist is far more significant IMO. If one party had said the man was wearing a hat or was short and fat etc etc then that would be cause for serious doubt IMO. But both descriptions in relation to age, height, build and clothing were remarkably close.
I used to think this man must be involved because he never came forward, and neither did anyone else i.e. the person he was taking the child to - or the person from whom he had collected the child. I would have expected say - for instance - someone ringing the police saying 'that was my son - he was taking his daughter home - I had been babysitting''. etc etc.
Since then I have changed my mind - as if the locals were really scared of the PJ (as Mrs Fenn mentioned)- then I can imagine the man's mother or wife saying 'Please don't get involved - you could end up being accused of this crime'. So he decided to keep out of it. Who knows.
