Is there any hard evidence whatsoever in the Madeleine McCann case?

[Brietta]

Professor Barclay is a former FSS specialist who helped the shape best practice in forensic work in the UK.  He looked at the shutters and introduced some lines of inquiry.  See 36:30 in this documentary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InJLmyakzeE . 

My view is that his perspective is one that needs listening to.  It is nuanced, fair minded and objective.

Thank you.

Is he also the person who wondered at the information supposedly being 'leaked' from the FSS in relation to the DNA evidence ... as he considered such leaks unprecedented in his experience.  Bearing in mind the documentary was released prior to the actual FSS findings being made public.

[Gadfly2.1]

First, I think the poor recall is something that all detectives know about.  Mr Redwood is no different and given that Mrs Tanner identified a man decisively during the private investigation who was later ruled out, I think his team felt comfortable in their efforts to sort out the Tanner sighting and put it on more stable ground.

Secondly, it is indeed strange that the "number one focus" to quote Mr Redwood of SY's investigation is not featured on the Find Madeleine website.  I never said it was sinister, just simply strange given that that website is one of the key internet portals for information -- yet there is no image of this e-fit:

[Alice Purjorick]

I suppose the reality is that in October 2013 (possibly before) DCI Andy deffed out "Tannerman The Abductor" and became interested in the elusive "Smithman" whom he wished to identify.

[faithlilly]

What were in the files that were unknown to him then that might have made him draw a different conclusion now?

No idea but what we do know is that at the time the new investigation was launched all the files had not been studied.

[Alfred R Jones]

No idea but what we do know is that at the time the new investigation was launched all the files had not been studied.

No idea???  Have you not read the files then??? What's with the "not all the files had been studied" nonsense?  Are you saying the PJ just filed stuff without studying it?

[Miss Taken Identity]

Thank you.

Is he also the person who wondered at the information supposedly being 'leaked' from the FSS in relation to the DNA evidence ... as he considered such leaks unprecedented in his experience.  Bearing in mind the documentary was released prior to the actual FSS findings being made public.

Yes, he said he did not believe FSS were leaking information of a 'live' investigation, as per his 20 odd years experience working in that field, and that people were guessing and reporting misinformation.

[Alfred R Jones]

First, I think the poor recall is something that all detectives know about.  Mr Redwood is no different and given that Mrs Tanner identified a man decisively during the private investigation who was later ruled out, I think his team felt comfortable in their efforts to sort out the Tanner sighting and put it on more stable ground.

So you are unable to provide any evidence whatsoever to back up your claim and instead repeat an oft-cited myth that JT "decisively ID'ed" someone.  Shame.

Secondly, it is indeed strange that the "number one focus" to quote Mr Redwood of SY's investigation is not featured on the Find Madeleine website.  I never said it was sinister, just simply strange given that that website is one of the key internet portals for information -- yet there is no image of this e-fit:

[/quote]And yet these e-fits featured prominently on the Find Madeleine FB page (posted there on at least 3 separate occasions) at the time of the Crimewatch programme - perhaps their absence on the Find Madeleine page is more indicative of a poorly maintained website in favour of a far more active and well managed FB page?  Or perhaps you're more comfortable with your "strange" feelings. 

[Brietta]

My view is that Andy Redwood believed the Tanner sighting was at best poor recall, and at worst, something more sinister.  Second, I would say that Mr Redwood's key focus of the investigation - the Smith Sighting - is not found on Mr and Mrs McCann's website.  This may suggest - on one reading of the situation - that there is a fundamental disagreement between the two camps.  Further, the Find Madeline website states: "Based or {sic} more recent information, the Metropolitan Police now believe this man may represent a guest at the Ocean Club who was carrying his daughter back to their apartment. However as it is not possible to be certain that these two men are actually the same person."  That is strange since Mr Redwood said he is "almost certain" that it is not -- and what's more, he produced a witness, who himself believes he is the man in question.

I don't know where you get the impression there are 'two camps' when it comes to the Scotland Yard investigation and the parents of a missing child. Both have exactly the same aim ... and that is to find Madeleine McCann.

I am sure that SY and the PJ investigations have progressed way beyond tannerman and smithman and will have gleaned whatever there is from both while continuing to investigate evidential opportunities either discarded back in 2007 or which have developed into paths worth pursuing into 2015.

[Miss Taken Identity]

First, I think the poor recall is something that all detectives know about.  Mr Redwood is no different and given that Mrs Tanner identified a man decisively during the private investigation who was later ruled out, I think his team felt comfortable in their efforts to sort out the Tanner sighting and put it on more stable ground.

Secondly, it is indeed strange that the "number one focus" to quote Mr Redwood of SY's investigation is not featured on the Find Madeleine website.  I never said it was sinister, just simply strange given that that website is one of the key internet portals for information -- yet there is no image of this e-fit:

It is indeed strange since the fund is called 'no stone unturned' and yet this stone has not been recognised?
If I were a worried parent, I would want to know who 'smithman' was... even to eliminate from the suspect list.

[Gadfly2.1]

Alfred - in the documentary by Channel 5, Jane Tanner was revealed to have ID'd a market trader.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLAqiisgBBY 21:00 here.  "That is the guy that I saw carrying the child."

[Brietta]

It is indeed strange since the fund is called 'no stone unturned' and yet this stone has not been recognised?
If I were a worried parent, I would want to know who 'smithman' was... even to eliminate from the suspect list.

There is no evidence that the efits to which you refer are representative of smithman, and I think you can be assured that Madeleine McCann's parents are up to speed with the available information.

[Gadfly2.1]

So you are unable to provide any evidence whatsoever to back up your claim and instead repeat an oft-cited myth that JT "decisively ID'ed" someone.  Shame.
And yet these e-fits featured prominently on the Find Madeleine FB page (posted there on at least 3 separate occasions) at the time of the Crimewatch programme - perhaps their absence on the Find Madeleine page is more indicative of a poorly maintained website in favour of a far more active and well managed FB page?  Or perhaps you're more comfortable with your "strange" feelings.

Maybe you're right.  I'm sure that the webmaster has not got around to updating the site, and i'm sure that no one has been in touch to point out that there seems to be more focus on the Barcelona lead than the 10pm lead that is linked to the location of the abduction - Luz.

[Gadfly2.1]

There is no evidence that the efits to which you refer are representative of smithman, and I think you can be assured that Madeleine McCann's parents are up to speed with the available information.

Unfortunately Brietta, the Policia Judiciaria do not release information in that way.  It is how they work, you see.

[faithlilly]

No idea???  Have you not read the files then??? What's with the "not all the files had been studied" nonsense?  Are you saying the PJ just filed stuff without studying it?

OG had not read all the files when Redwood made his statement.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23179230

[Alice Purjorick]

There is no evidence that the efits to which you refer are representative of smithman, and I think you can be assured that Madeleine McCann's parents are up to speed with the available information.

Well whoever he was DCI Andy wanted to identify him. You can't odds that. So far no one has come forward that we have been advised of. Hint: does he remain on The Met site anywhere?