the Times did not libel the Mccanns...they printed facts......and the Mccanns didn't sue either despite some bright sparks thinking they did...the Times probably couldn't be bothered to get into a legal wrangle and a negligent 50k was paid out, it was after all to charity
What the Times printed was factual, the Mccanns had the efits which Redwood plastered all over Crimewatch for years before he did so
To this day (as before) the Mccanns have not publicised these efits in any substantial way anywhere...they must not be important in their minds, like, you know, they know better etc
Did SY have to get permission from the McCanns to get the Smithman file?
In 2008, the McCanns used money from their charity fund to hire investigators from a firm called Oakley International, led by former MI5 surveillance officer Henri Exton, to look into the mystery – and they focused on the Smith sighting.
One of the Oakley investigators said last week: “I was absolutely stunned when I watched the programme…It most certainly wasn’t a new timeline and it certainly isn’t a new revelation. It is absolute nonsense to suggest either of those things…And those E-Fits you saw on Crimewatch are ours,” he said.
Exton confirmed last week that the fund had silenced his investigators for years after they handed over their controversial findings. He said: “A letter came from their lawyers binding us to the confidentiality of the report.”
He claimed the legal threat had prevented him from handing over the report to Scotland Yard’s fresh investigation, until detectives had obtained written permission from the fund.
