The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?

[faithlilly]

Incidentally the Smithman e-fits were the OFM Facebook's cover photo for a whole month from October to November 2013.  Now, that's not nearly long enough for people like Faithlilly, but if the McCanns really WERE terrified of these e-fits then they could simply have chosen to ignore them altogether, but the fact is - they haven't.  They gave them extreme prominence at the time of the Crimewatch programme and for weeks afterwards.  The fact that they are no longer pinned to the top of the FB page may be for a variety  of reasons, not least that the Met may have decided to scale down their importance to the investigation.  It's possible isn't it?

You're simply playing catch up Alfie. You know it and I know it, damn the whole forum knows it.

The McCanns failed to release to the public efits of a man seen with a child matching Madeleine's description on the night of the 3rd even though their own PIs thought they were a more important lead than Tanner's sighting, which was released.

Further after a brief month in a prominent position on the only campaign webpage that seems to be regularly updated the efits are now resigned to a video representation which can only be accessed through a non-description button linked to a webpage that everybody seems to have forgotten.

SY made it known two years ago that the efits are of very great importance to their investigation and nothing they have said since has changed that.

[John]

It strikes me as somewhat remarkable that neither Leicestershire Constabulary nor the PJ came to the conclusion that promoting these e-fits would in any way advance the search for Madeleine yet some 5 years later SY look upon them as a unique development.  So what changed?

[Alice Purjorick]

It strikes me as somewhat remarkable that neither Leicestershire Constabulary nor the PJ came to the conclusion that promoting these e-fits would in any way advance the search for Madeleine yet some 5 years later SY look upon them as a unique development.  So what changed?

Tannerman got himself fragged?

[Alfred R Jones]

You're simply playing catch up Alfie. You know it and I know it, damn the whole forum knows it.

The McCanns failed to release to the public efits of a man seen with a child matching Madeleine's description on the night of the 3rd even though their own PIs thought they were a more important lead than Tanner's sighting, which was released.

Further after a brief month in a prominent position on the only campaign webpage that seems to be regularly updated the efits are now resigned to a video representation which can only be accessed through a non-description button linked to a webpage that everybody seems to have forgotten.

SY made it known two years ago that the efits are of very great importance to their investigation and nothing they have said since has changed that.

Quite - the Met have said nothing about those e-fits for nearly two years, have done nothing themselves to re-publicise them, what might that suggest to you? 

I don't understand your point re: the "watch video" on the OFM FB page - it links straight to the Crimewatch programme on the OFM's youtube channel and has been watched nearly 100,000 times.

[Alice Purjorick]

Quite - the Met have said nothing about those e-fits for nearly two years, have done nothing themselves to re-publicise them, what might that suggest to you? 

I don't understand your point re: the "watch video" on the OFM FB page - it links straight to the Crimewatch programme on the OFM's youtube channel and has been watched nearly 100,000 times.

They now have the information they wanted.
They have eliminated the guy from their enquiries.
It was a bum steer.
Whichever they ain't cracking on to it. So lets all keep on guessing shall we ?

[faithlilly]

Quite - the Met have said nothing about those e-fits for nearly two years, have done nothing themselves to re-publicise them, what might that suggest to you? 

I don't understand your point re: the "watch video" on the OFM FB page - it links straight to the Crimewatch programme on the OFM's youtube channel and has been watched nearly 100,000 times.

Tell me Alfie what would you expect them to say ? If the person featured in the fits has been eliminated why are the efits still on either campaign website, albeit in a non-prominent position ?

[Alfred R Jones]

They now have the information they wanted.
They have eliminated the guy from their enquiries.
It was a bum steer.
Whichever they ain't cracking on to it. So lets all keep on guessing shall we ?

All distinct possibilities - and all potentially very good reasons why neither the Met's Op Grange page nor the OFM FB page are refreshing the e-fit information on a regular basis. But no, let's just assume that it's because the McCanns are guilty and terrified instead, it's so much more fun that way!

[Alfred R Jones]

Tell me Alfie what would you expect them to say ? If the person featured in the fits has been eliminated why are the efits still on either campaign website, albeit in a non-prominent position ?

If the Met's £10m investigation totally hinged on those 2 e-fits and they were not getting any information about Smithman coming through then I would expect them to re-promote them, why wouldn't they?

[Alice Purjorick]

All distinct possibilities - and all potentially very good reasons why neither the Met's Op Grange page nor the OFM FB page are refreshing the e-fit information on a regular basis. But no, let's just assume that it's because the McCanns are guilty and terrified instead, it's so much more fun that way!

Red bit: a reason why the Met may not be refreshing their site but do you believe The Met would have told the McCanns "Smithman" had been deffed out (assuming he has been)?
Blue bit: Nah! but I find it fun watching.


oops there wasn't a blue bit.

[Carana]

We are discussing the e-fits and why the McCanns didn't promote them as the parents of any missing child would do.  Any suggestions?

Potential legal hassles with Halligen & co., and the need for assured professional follow-up by law enforcement.

[Alfred R Jones]

Red bit: a reason why the Met may not be refreshing their site but do you believe The Met would have told the McCanns "Smithman" had been deffed out (assuming he has been)?
Blue bit: Nah! but I find it fun watching.


oops there wasn't a blue bit.

The Met and the McCanns have both said that the latter are being kept in the loop by the former re developments, but no doubt you sneer at this.

[Carana]

It strikes me as somewhat remarkable that neither Leicestershire Constabulary nor the PJ came to the conclusion that promoting these e-fits would in any way advance the search for Madeleine yet some 5 years later SY look upon them as a unique development.  So what changed?

LP wasn't in charge of the investigation: the PJ was. The PJ apparently had them, but they weren't known for publicising e-fits. Once the case was archived, there WAS no active investigation.

What changed was that the Met dealt with it. That may include any underlying issues and were able follow up on leads.

[Montclair]

LP wasn't in charge of the investigation: the PJ was. The PJ apparently had them, but they weren't known for publicising e-fits. Once the case was archived, there WAS no active investigation.

What changed was that the Met dealt with it. That may include any underlying issues and were able follow up on leads.

There is no proof that the PJ had the e-fits.

[Gadfly2.1]

Back to the question, are they less than happy with them?

Well, if they were happy - or further than that - ecstatic with them, what would we expect their approach to be?  Certainly, they would have surely given them continued prominence on their site - as they would see them as a major breakthrough in the case - as AR seemed to put it on CW. 

The truth is that they have been removed from the Official Madeleine site.  Previously, a new click through page with various e-fits was there.  Then it was removed and the Scotland Yard's thinking was cast doubt upon. There was a change - and that may suggest that they are indeed less than happy with them.

Taken from Find Madeline: "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, if you have seen this man in the pictures or suspect who it may be, please contact the Metropolitan Police's OPERATION GRANGE on 0207 321 9251 (0044 207 321 9251 from outside the UK) or Operation.Grange@met.pnn.police.uk and/or the Find Madeleine team on +44 845 838 4699 or investigation@findmadeleine.com."

Or it may suggest as some have noted that the e-fits have served their purpose and no longer need to be in the public realm.  I very much doubt the family have been told this by SY -- simply because if that was the case, they wouldn't feature on the facebook site AT ALL.

[Carana]

There is no proof that the PJ had the e-fits.

What's this then? Yet again...


Kate and Gerry McCann and Madeleine's Fund
The Sunday Times Published: 28 December 2013

In articles dated October 23 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/regulars/corrections/article1357081.ece