Has Martin Smith Changed his Opinion ?

[ferryman]

Which is why the Smith sighting is so important (potentially) ....

[jassi]

Shame that the McCanns didn't think so and concentrated on Tannerman.

[stephen25000]

Which is why the Smith sighting is so important (potentially) ....

Do you get irony ?

[ferryman]

I can see through (weak) attempts at irony, yes ....

[pegasus]

Which is why the Smith sighting is so important (potentially) ....

But Ferryman both parents clearly state that the missing child was wearing a very short sleeved top.
The girl seen by the 9 irish witness had full-length sleeves. How do you explain that?

[ferryman]

But Ferryman both parents clearly state that the missing child was wearing a very short sleeved top.
The girl seen by the 9 irish witness had full-length sleeves. How do you explain that?

It would not surprise me in the slightest if the files held by police differ from those we read on-line ....

[ferryman]

Shame that the McCanns didn't think so and concentrated on Tannerman.

The McCanns handed the efits to the Metropolitan police and let them decide the best time to release them (the efits).

[stephen25000]

The McCanns handed the efits to the Metropolitan police and let them decide the best time to release them (the efits).

and what stopped the mccanns doing that ?

After all, they were supposed to be searching for their beloved child.

[ferryman]

In summary, Martin Smith has most certainly changed his mind ....

[pegasus]

(By Amaral's theory) ....(snip)

I'm impressed that you understand his theory Ferryman.

[stephen25000]

In summary, Martin Smith has most certainly changed his mind ....

Then prove it.

Meanwhile what we do know is, people acting on behalf of the mccanns interfered with a possibly key witness.

[pegasus]

The McCanns handed the efits to the Metropolitan police and let them decide the best time to release them (the efits).

I thought the Met were not involved in the case at the date in 2008 when the privately contracted investigators did those 2 efits?

[ferryman]

I thought the Met were not involved in the case at the date in 2008 when the privately contracted investigators did those 2 efits?

Martin Smith produced the efit after the end of January 2008.  In his statement to the Irish Gardia police, at that date, he said he had been approached by Brian Kennedy to produce an efit, but had refused.

It is clear that at some point later, he changed his mind and decided, after all, to produce an efit (because he realised he had been mistaken to suppose he had seen Gerry).

When isn't exactly clear, but it would have been pretty much at the point that the first, joint, enquiry was winding down.

Very obviously, as the Smiths might well have witnessed Madeleine's abduction, that efit could only be released in the context of a live and on-going enquiry, and the Met (clearly in possession of the efits well before their release) chose the moment of the Crimewatch programme to release them ....

[ferryman]

Then prove it.

Meanwhile what we do know is, people acting on behalf of the mccanns interfered with a possibly key witness.

No we don't.

All the proof has been provided.

[Brietta]

It's a real shame no-one thought to take  photograph of GM carrying a child of similar physical characteristics to Madeleine & showing that to MS. The body position of Madeleine would have been rather different to that of S, given their relative heights.
IMO MS was sure he'd seen GM but not sure enough to put his name to a positive identification (something which had already been discounted by the PJ because of the time of the sighting).

I think the clincher in discounting Martin Smith's observation for those who knew about it at the time was the almost identical change to statements made by Martin Smith and Mr and Mrs McCluskey.

The McCluskeys went one better and identified Kate McCann as the woman they had seen in a distressed state on the 3rd May.

The change in the McCluskey statement and the change in the Smith statement came about after both parties were exposed to the media coverage of the case ... a fact which both included in their ammendments.

When Martin Smith had access to the files and what Mr McCluskey had to say ... I would be of the opinion he would have given it a lot of serious thought which would surprise me greatly if it didn't lead to him reconsidering his opinion.

At sixty to eighty percent certainty it was tremendously shaky in any case.