The Quality of Witnesses in the Case.

[faithlilly]

Errr....speak to Pathfinder.  He or she has certainly proved it, going by phone records.  Tough tomatos, you're theory is in tatters.

So what phone call eliminates 10.13 being the time of the alert ?

[Alfred R Jones]

So what phone call eliminates 10.13 being the time of the alert ?

Emma Louise KNIGHT



Quote

On the night of 3rd May, after having finished work, I planned to meet a group of colleagues at 22.30 to go out. At about 22.17 I received a call from Lyndsey Johnson, the Crèche Manager, informing me that the girl had gone missing. I met Lyndsey and the Service Manager, Amy Tierney, near to the Tapas Bar and we initiated the “Mark Warner procedures for the search of a missing child”.

Earlier Pathfinder verified that this was correct.  If you dispute this, take it up with him or her.

Pathfinder's response to the above quote:

Yes that is correct 4 minutes after 10:13. A parent came to the night creche and informed them she heard voices calling for Maddy outside on her way there. The night creche is not very close to the tapas bar. So the alarm was raised before 10:13 that's for certain

[Brietta]

I haven't read that she said that. Gerry was at the table when the alarm was raised by Kate but the important point is that Smithman was seen after that and not far away. Smithman was running remember not walking. The child was hidden.

The individual was not described as running ... all three statements reflect that the individual was walking ... why do you feel it necessary to change the words to suit your argument?

When Goncalo Amaral tried to fit the evidence to suit his theory the die was cast as far as finding Madeleine McCann was concerned ... I do wish that those who continue to support his theory would refrain from replicating his error.

Not that it matters now ... but it really did matter then.




 **Snip

This individual was walking the downward path ...  Martin Smith

(2) in his arms, walking along the pavement of Rua 25 de Abril. He was walking in her direction at a distance of, give or take, two metres. ... Aoife Smith

he saw an individual carrying a child, who walked normally, with a fairly quick step because he was coming downhill.  ... Peter Smith

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

[faithlilly]

Earlier Pathfinder verified that this was correct.  If you dispute this, take it up with him or her.

Pathfinder's response to the above quote:

You see there's that little word 'about' again. Three or four minutes either way wouldn't matter to the witness but certainly does in the context of the Smith sighting.

[pathfinder73]

The individual was not described as running ... all three statements reflect that the individual was walking ... why do you feel it necessary to change the words to suit your argument?

When Goncalo Amaral tried to fit the evidence to suit his theory the die was cast as far as finding Madeleine McCann was concerned ... I do wish that those who continue to support his theory would refrain from replicating his error.

Not that it matters now ... but it really did matter then.




 **Snip

This individual was walking the downward path ...  Martin Smith

(2) in his arms, walking along the pavement of Rua 25 de Abril. He was walking in her direction at a distance of, give or take, two metres. ... Aoife Smith

he saw an individual carrying a child, who walked normally, with a fairly quick step because he was coming downhill.  ... Peter Smith

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

Smithman would be running to where the child was hidden and then passed the Smiths carrying her.  He had an excuse to run as they were out searching for her and he found her before meeting the Smiths. So yes he quickly walked past them and even quicker when he was by the light passing Aoife.

"The individual's gait was normal, between a fast walk and a run." (AS)

[Alfred R Jones]

You see there's that little word 'about' again. Three or four minutes either way wouldn't matter to the witness but certainly does in the context of the Smith sighting.

You and Pathfinder seem reluctant to discuss this directly, very strange.  However Pathfinder has led me to believe that phone records exist of the phone call which would confirm the exact time would it not...?  &%+((£

[jassi]

Unfortunately we are not privy to the details of these, but rest assured, the police will be. 

[Alfred R Jones]

Unfortunately we are not privy to the details of these, but rest assured, the police will be. 

Perhaps then that is why, together with the witness testimony of all those who saw Gerry at the table when the alarm was raised, the police were confidently able to rule out Gerry as Smithman. 

[pathfinder73]

You and Pathfinder seem reluctant to discuss this directly, very strange.  However Pathfinder has led me to believe that phone records exist of the phone call which would confirm the exact time would it not...?  &%+((£

Phone records are a part of it but of course there's no phone record of when Kate was raised the alarm but there are other important details. You start the watch from 9:45 when Russell returned to the table (time confirmed by the waiter who served him his THIN steak) until when Kate left to check. She was not gone longer than 5 minutes. According to her it only took her 15 seconds to fly through the apartment checking for her daughter and then straight out the door. So not a long check by her at all!

[jassi]

Maybe, though abduction seems to be their remit, rather than anything else. They may be wearing blinkers to achieve this

[Alice Purjorick]

So in 4 minutes Kate has got up, gone to the apartment, looked for Madeleine, not been able to find her, come rushing back to the Tapas Restaurant, everyone except DW has got up and gone back to the apartment, Gerry has taken part in a cursory search of the apartment (fiddled with shutter?) then rushed back to the Tapas Restaurant?  And all in 4 minutes?  Are you sure...?  &%+((£

Plenty of time; it was after all, only "like being in the back garden".

[Alfred R Jones]

Phone records are a part of it but of course there's no phone record of when Kate was raised the alarm but there are other important details. You start the watch from 9:45 when Russell returned to the table (time confirmed by the waiter who served him his THIN steak) until when Kate left to check. She was not gone longer than 5 minutes. According to her it only took her 15 seconds to fly through the apartment checking for her daughter and then straight out the door. So not a long check by her at all!

Pathfinder, is there a phone record that you can cite which verifies Emma Louise Knight's statement?

[pathfinder73]

Maybe, though abduction seems to be their remit, rather than anything else. They may be wearing blinkers to achieve this

Tannerman gone and searching for evidence of a hidden body close to the crime scene. You can call Smithman an abductor. That's the only real evidence they have of abduction. A man seen carrying a child away who looked like Maddy and who hasn't been identified 8 years later.

[pathfinder73]

Pathfinder, is there a phone record that you can cite which verifies Emma Louise Knight's statement?

They don't say 22:17 on statements unless they know the phone record of it. It's easy to get Emma's mobile or John Hill's and get the times. They didn't delete them 

[Alfred R Jones]

They don't say 22:17 on statements unless they know the phone record of it. It's easy to get Emma's mobile or John Hill's and get the times. They didn't delete them 

Who is "they"?  Are you saying that when Emma says "about22.17" she actually means "exactly 22.17" because she looked at her phone?  Isn't that a bit presumptuous of you?  How do you know the clock on her phone was even showing the correct time?  You've greatly disappointed me Pathfinder... &%+((£