This paragraph is from the Calvert and Blake original:
The new focus shifted the believed timeline of the abduction back by 45 minutes. The report, delivered to the McCanns in November 2008, recommended that the revised timeline should be the basis for future investigations and that the Smith E-Fits should be released without delay.
Depending on when the e-fits were produced, that might have been sound advice (assuming a live and on-going investigation was in progress when the e-fits were produced).
But in November 2008, there certainly wasn't!
By 2009, the efits were in the hands of British and Portuguese police, who, themselves, chose the moment of the Crimewatch programme to release it.
So clearly nothing was suppressed/withheld for 5 years.
And as to emphasis on the Smith sightings, just read Kate's book.
Plenty in there about it. Plenty of emphasis ...
From the original Times article :
"A team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by the McCanns to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine.
But within months the relationship had soured. A report produced by the investigators was deemed "hypercritical" of the McCanns and their friends, and the authors were threatened with legal action if it was made public. Its contents remained secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the authors and asked for a copy."
And
"An earlier sighting by one of the McCanns' friends was dismissed as less credible after "serious inconsistencies" were found in her evidence. The report also raised questions about "anomalies" in the statements given by the McCanns and their friends."
So even if the efits were handed over to the relevant authorities, albeit after over a years delay, the Oakley report certainly wasn't and it took a request from SY to the fund for the contents to be revealed.
So there was certainly suppression of important information, the only mistake the Times made was to choose the wrong piece as their centrepiece.
