Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?

[Robittybob1]

They would need a few photos showing the man's appearance nearly 11 years ago - plus pictures of the child. too.

Are you talking now.  If the person came forward now, after the 11 years.   I hadn't seen a person for 40 years and he still recognised me, but I wouldn't have recognised him.  So I would not make predictions about that.

[misty]

Are you talking now.  If the person came forward now, after the 11 years.   I hadn't seen a person for 40 years and he still recognised me, but I wouldn't have recognised him.  So I would not make predictions about that.

Would he still have recognised you if his only previous meeting with you had been a fleeting glance in the dark 11 years ago?

[Robittybob1]

Would he still have recognised you if his only previous meeting with you had been a fleeting glance in the dark 11 years ago?

With what we discussed about the generation of false memories, you might "remember" if the person had featured in the media.

[misty]

With what we discussed about the generation of false memories, you might "remember" if the person had featured in the media.

GMc was in the media for weeks before MS had his throwback moment. 8 others did not have the same moment back then so they won't now. Any identification of an individual coming forward now would be totally unreliable.
All IMO.

[slartibartfast]

Or someone fed Gemma duff info......and she acted upon it.

You mean went to the source and asked the question?

[misty]

You mean went to the source and asked the question?

The "source" has never sought any publicity & presumably is still bound by judicial secrecy. On reflection, I can only wonder why the entire article was devoted to a family who would not recognise Smithman if they saw him again, although one member thought the child-carrier was Gerry McCann. What was the point of the whole exercise?


ETA Maybe the point was to re-emphasise that Gerry was Smithman. Maybe the police investigation is getting a little too close to home.

[Mr Gray]

You mean went to the source and asked the question?

We do not have a quote from Martin Smith.... Just hearsay from GO.. I would like to know exactly  what he said...

[misty]

We do not have a quote from Martin Smith.... Just hearsay from GO.. I would lime to know exactly  what he said...

Did he use a Portuguese/American interpreter, perchance?

[slartibartfast]

A bit of straw clutching going on?

[Mr Gray]

A bit of straw clutching going on?

Straw clutching by sceptics who somehow  see this as important... Yes I agree

[slartibartfast]

Straw clutching by sceptics who somehow  see this as important... Yes I agree

No, an investigative journalist has stated that she has gone back to a primary source and for some reason supporters see this as risible.

[pathfinder73]

No wonder the case is still open to get Smithmutehidehisaccentman

[G-Unit]

I wonder who started the rumour that Martin Smith had changed his mind about who he saw that night and what  they were trying to achieve?

[slartibartfast]

I wonder who started the rumour that Martin Smith had changed his mind about who he saw that night and what  they were trying to achieve?

I can think of some candidates but no proof.

[Alice Purjorick]

I wonder who started the rumour that Martin Smith had changed his mind about who he saw that night and what  they were trying to achieve?

Such a question frequently has the response "cui  est bono"?. Well on here the misquote of qui bono is used but ne'er mind eh?.

Whilst dicking about I found this which appealed to my sense of humour.

Cui bono should also never be the only question to ask, as benefits from an event are never enough to directly implicate one with an action. If it is only asked who benefits from something and other factors are not taken into account, ridiculous conclusions can be extrapolated. Take the following example:

Emperor Penguins thrive in extremely cold climates. Many other species don't. Therefore it is obvious that Emperor Penguins have the most to gain from a cold Antarctica, hence Emperor Penguins are responsible for the cold in extreme southern latitudes.

It could - and should - have been asked whether Emperor Penguins even have the means to make it cold in Antarctica, which they obviously don't.

A different example would be the moon landing hoax theories that get increasingly complicated until landing on the moon is actually the easier proposition.