SY Crimewatch Smithman Efits

[Alice Purjorick]

And don't forget by their own investigators who saw Tanner as an unreliable witness.

So the PI's agreed with Boogah Man I ?

[faithlilly]

So the PI's agreed with Boogah Man I ?

Oakley certainly did.

[Alfred R Jones]

And yet they were both wrong as JT was utterly vindicated by the Met.  She described accurately what she saw and when she saw it, the only problem was it wasn't the abductor she saw,  but according to the Met it was a man carrying his own sleeping child.  She wasn't to know that at the time, but in all other respects she was correct.

[pegasus]

And yet they were both wrong as JT was utterly vindicated by the Met.  She described accurately what she saw and when she saw it, the only problem was it wasn't the abductor she saw,  but according to the Met it was a man carrying his own sleeping child.  She wasn't to know that at the time, but in all other respects she was correct.

I absolutely agree Alfred.
Do you think the same thing could happen with the Smith sighting - completely honest witnesses seeing an innocent father and daughter?

[Alfred R Jones]

I absolutely agree Alfred.
Do you think the same thing could happen with the Smith sighting - completely honest witnesses seeing an innocent father and daughter?

Yes, I think it's possible.

[pegasus]

Yes, I think it's possible.

Me too. The child they saw had sleeves of completely different length to the missing child's sleeves.

[ShiningInLuz]

Thankyou ShiningInLuz for your research. I still don't see anything in portuguese which specifically appeals for a man who was walking down Rua Escola Primeira and possibly Travessa Das Escadhinas.
I give an example in a current case in York of a missing Ms Lawrence. Police released an appeal in the national language for people to identify a man and the important thing is as well as publishing the cctv they also gave the location (street names) of the sighting.

My recent post on my blog re this was to much the same end.

The effort to put Smithman into context, and to put this in the Portuguese language, registers roughly a zero on the Richter scale.

I have just posted the Crimewatch background, method and aim on my blog, in Portuguese, so perhaps we are up to a 1 on the zero to 10 scale.

Mind you, for many reasons, I think the scale is still registering a zero.

[faithlilly]

And yet they were both wrong as JT was utterly vindicated by the Met.  She described accurately what she saw and when she saw it, the only problem was it wasn't the abductor she saw,  but according to the Met it was a man carrying his own sleeping child.  She wasn't to know that at the time, but in all other respects she was correct.

Tell me Alfie how were SY going to ditch Tannerman and concentrate on their main suspect without  having to take legal action  against Tanner ?

[Carana]

Tell me Alfie how were SY going to ditch Tannerman and concentrate on their main suspect without  having to take legal action  against Tanner ?

What on earth for?

[faithlilly]

What on earth for?

Then you tell me how else SY would be able to ditch Tannerman without calling Tanner a liar......she dreamt it perhaps ?

[Carana]

Then you tell me how else SY would be able to ditch Tannerman without calling Tanner a liar......she dreamt it perhaps ?

The Met thinks that Crècheman could have been Tannerman, hence the appeal to witnesses to concentrate on the Smithman timeframe.

That doesn't mean that someone could not have rung up to say that they'd definitely seen someone who didn't appear to be Crècheman, in which case the likelihood could be in more question than it was, yet Smithman still hasn't been identified (unless he has been since that appeal).

It's alo possible that neither sightings are relevant...

[faithlilly]

The Met thinks that Crècheman could have been Tannerman, hence the appeal to witnesses to concentrate on the Smithman timeframe.

That doesn't mean that someone could not have rung up to say that they'd definitely seen someone who didn't appear to be Crècheman, in which case the likelihood could be in more question than it was, yet Smithman still hasn't been identified (unless he has been since that appeal).

It's alo possible that neither sightings are relevant...

Or it could be possible SY were stupid enough to believed that two separate men, almost identical in height, build and clothes were floating around town on the 3rd carrying almost identical children sporting no shoes or cover on a cold evening........no I  doubt it as well.

[pegasus]

(snip) ... It's alo possible that neither sightings are relevant...

Precisely Carana - Sherlock Holmes would have immediately recognised that all sightings of open-unconcealed-carrying are irrelevant, for they contradict the most basic characteristic of the criminal mind - to hide or disguise from direct view what he is doing.

[Carana]

Or it could be possible SY were stupid enough to believed that two separate men, almost identical in height, build and clothes were floating around town on the 3rd carrying almost identical children sporting no shoes or cover on a cold evening........no I  doubt it as well.

At least one PT rentagob respected professional found the idea that an abductor would have risked simply walking off with an abducted child to be ridiculous. For some reason, no one questioned why it might equally appear equally ridiculous that various people would offer a false alibi for a dad carrying his dead child through the streets also with a risk of being seen.

[faithlilly]

At least one PT rentagob respected professional found the idea that an abductor would have risked simply walking off with an abducted child to be ridiculous. For some reason, no one questioned why it might equally appear equally ridiculous that various people would offer a false alibi for a dad carrying his dead child through the streets also with a risk of being seen.

Not sure of the relevance to my post though Carana. Do you think it's credible that SY, at one point, believed there were two almost identical men carrying an uncovered child around PDL on the 3rd ?