Author Topic: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?  (Read 28773 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pathfinder73

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #60 on: March 08, 2015, 02:16:37 PM »
Tannerman has not been conclusively ruled out and smithman may be an innocent tourist

An innocent tourist didn't hide efits. Time for the yard to investigate the samsung mobiles.
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #61 on: March 08, 2015, 02:18:04 PM »
An innocent tourist didn't hide efits. Time for the yard to investigate the samsung mobiles.

why don't you drop them a line

Offline pathfinder73

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #62 on: March 08, 2015, 02:23:52 PM »
why don't you drop them a line

They seem to be on the right track. When they go off it I may do that.
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #63 on: March 08, 2015, 03:19:14 PM »

I can't fathom why there are those who think they are entitled to know everything the police know in an active investigation; one thing I am sure of is that SY know a great deal more about Madeleine's case than has been released into the public domain.
I don't profess to know much about what two groups of fuzz think; they sure as hell know a lot more than they tell the public and more than the two or three flavours of posters on here.
The Yard did however tell the public (refer to Crimewatch if you are in doubt) that the man Jane Tanner saw was not "the abductor" and that Smithman remains an unidentified person of interest. You just can't odds it no matter how many mirrors and how much smoke you try to use.
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #64 on: March 08, 2015, 03:28:50 PM »
I don't profess to know much about what two groups of fuzz think; they sure as hell know a lot more than they tell the public and more than the two or three flavours of posters on here.
The Yard did however tell the public (refer to Crimewatch if you are in doubt) that the man Jane Tanner saw was not "the abductor" and that Smithman remains an unidentified person of interest. You just can't odds it no matter how many mirrors and how much smoke you try to use.

you will find that they have not ruled tannerman completely...
Police probe: DCI Andy Redwood last night reveals that he was 'almost certain that the man seen by Jane Tanner is not Madeleine's abductor'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2460669/Madeleine-McCann-kidnapping-innocent-British-father-mistaken-key-suspect.html#ixzz3ToCBgu9O
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

« Last Edit: March 08, 2015, 03:31:09 PM by davel »

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #65 on: March 08, 2015, 03:32:56 PM »
you will find that they have not ruled tannerman completely

You mean Andy Redwood's "almost certain we are positive we might have" routine.
The Yard don't seem to be asking for asking Tannerman II to be coming forward though do they?
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #66 on: March 08, 2015, 03:36:20 PM »
You mean Andy Redwood's "almost certain we are positive we might have" routine.
The Yard don't seem to be asking for asking Tannerman II to be coming forward though do they?

I mean exactly what I said

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #67 on: March 08, 2015, 04:05:44 PM »

Another man seen carrying a child near to the apartments where the family were staying - who was for years considered the chief suspect - has been excluded from the investigation.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10402102/Madeleine-McCann-case-reopened-by-Portugal-police.html
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline faithlilly

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #68 on: March 08, 2015, 05:32:29 PM »
what does it matter...nothing on here is of any importance

Care to answer the question asked ?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #69 on: March 09, 2015, 11:14:41 AM »
Another man seen carrying a child near to the apartments where the family were staying - who was for years considered the chief suspect - has been excluded from the investigation.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10402102/Madeleine-McCann-case-reopened-by-Portugal-police.html
And from Telegraph article in the link

"Detective chief inspector Andy Redwood, who is leading the British investigation, said witnesses had spotted a man carrying a young child fitting Madeleine's description towards the port area of Praia da Luz."

Wow.  Not to the beach, to the beach.  Not to the mound, to the mound.  The Telegraph has now invented to the port, to the port.  Thank goodness we don't have a port, or someone would suggest digging it up.

From the same article
"Correio da Manha, a Portuguese newspaper, has reported officers have been looking at the possibility that a foreign paedophile gang took Madeleine." (in a planned abduction.)  I wonder if CdM is correct about this?

Presumably there is a planned abduction thread on here.  I have been working on a planned abduction theory at ShiningInLuz and I was just about to start on the problems with that idea.  I'd like to see what you lot have already said about a planned abduction.

Thanks!
What's up, old man?

Offline G-Unit

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #70 on: March 09, 2015, 12:43:36 PM »
Ha ha. Crecheman taking his child from the creche but heading towards it and Smithman heading towards a non existent port. Some people need to study Praia da Luz more closely I think.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline misty

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #71 on: March 15, 2015, 12:06:30 AM »

https://www.facebook.com/diggingformadeleinmccann
https://www.facebook.com/ajax/sharer/?s=11&appid=2392950137&id=441764182653281&p%5B0%5D=441764182653281&sharer_type=all_modes

This is a 13 second video clip which provides a great perspective of the Smith's sighting. The pavements  & road appear narrower than in the PJ photos in the files.
« Last Edit: March 15, 2015, 12:14:11 AM by misty »

Offline Brietta

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #72 on: March 15, 2015, 12:56:31 AM »
https://www.facebook.com/diggingformadeleinmccann
https://www.facebook.com/ajax/sharer/?s=11&appid=2392950137&id=441764182653281&p%5B0%5D=441764182653281&sharer_type=all_modes

This is a 13 second video clip which provides a great perspective of the Smith's sighting. The pavements  & road appear narrower than in the PJ photos in the files.

I hadn't really noticed the bollard on the pavement at approximately the position Martin and Mary were when passing the individual.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline misty

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #73 on: March 15, 2015, 01:20:05 AM »
I hadn't really noticed the bollard on the pavement at approximately the position Martin and Mary were when passing the individual.

Nor had I, but it was there in  the 2007 photos. Having watched Birch walk down the road, it struck me how little passing space there would have been if the Smiths were walking 2 abreast. There appears to be barely enough room for a person to walk safely on the pavement (especially in the dark).

Offline Brietta

Re: Should We Doubt the Smith's Testimony ?
« Reply #74 on: March 15, 2015, 01:33:49 AM »
Nor had I, but it was there in  the 2007 photos. Having watched Birch walk down the road, it struck me how little passing space there would have been if the Smiths were walking 2 abreast. There appears to be barely enough room for a person to walk safely on the pavement (especially in the dark).

Walkers on that pavement would have had two obstacles to avoid in 2007 there was a pole for the road sign right on the curve of the pavement.
I don't see it on the latest footage.

I think it possible that at that point on the pavement people would walk single file or walk on the road.

Watching Birch walking toward camera makes you realise how little room there is for passing.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....