Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?

[Robittybob1]

Sylvia Batista knew Murat by sight after the event but apparently she made a mistake in identifying him as being near 5A on the night of the 3rd May 2007.

Are you really able to pin her down on that?  I find she never did this, in fact she never says she knew RM in my opinion.  Is that possible - she never knew RM at all?  What did she know before the event?

[Wonderfulspam]

I note you have the word "Smiths" in plural, so that judgement is based on the majority of the Smiths not just the patriarch.
'The Smiths themselves now believe they saw someone else'  Martin still could have stuck out and that statement still be true.

If you bother to watch Panorama, you'll understand the context & notice that was the precise wording used.

Thanks.

(20:40)
https://youtu.be/Aq-1YrpZsuU

[pathfinder73]

Confirmation that the Smith's 2 efits were compiled with the assistance of Martin & PETER Smith.

Thanks Misty.

Omega memo 08/09/08: "the SMITH family are now (and should always have been treated as) the investigation’s most important witnesses".

And what happened? 

[Robittybob1]

That's just Spammy trying to slip one over.

It would be different if it was said in the program 'Martin Smith himself now believes he saw someone else'   but it was 'The Smiths themselves now believe they saw someone else'   and from recollection that was true, Mrs Smith and Peter and Aoife all thought it wasn't Gerry.  Those Smiths believe they saw someone other than Gerry.
Martin Smith could tell somehow it wasn't Robert Murat.  Height could be a factor, build, or style of walking, and one that keeps getting mentioned - sweaty (body odour?).

[Brietta]

Your criticism of Gemma Doherty is surprising to me because you have never demanded that the MSM adhere to the standards you are demanding from her. I have noticed that you tend to reproduce MSM articles on here as if they were factual even though they contain no named or verifiable sources.

Cite please.

[misty]

Thanks Misty.

Omega memo 08/09/08: "the SMITH family are now (and should always have been treated as) the investigation’s most important witnesses".

And what happened? 

The PJ didn't consider that the family were the investigation's most important witnesses - either because GM was placed elsewhere at the time or because there really, really was an abductor.

[Wonderfulspam]

It would be different if it was said in the program 'Martin Smith himself now believes he saw someone else'   but it was 'The Smiths themselves now believe they saw someone else'   and from recollection that was true, Mrs Smith and Peter and Aoife all thought it wasn't Gerry.  Those Smiths believe they saw someone other than Gerry.
Martin Smith could tell somehow it wasn't Robert Murat.  Height could be a factor, build, or style of walking, and one that keeps getting mentioned - sweaty (body odour?).

If the comment were true, then, why edit it from the programme?

Probably because it wasn't.

[Robittybob1]

If you bother to watch Panorama, you'll understand the context & notice that was the precise wording used.

Thanks.

(20:40)
https://youtu.be/Aq-1YrpZsuU

It is easy to think all the Smiths agree but it isn't essential. It could have just been a majority verdict.

[Robittybob1]

If the comment were true, then, why edit it from the programme?

Probably because it wasn't.

I agree it is easily construed that Martin Smith had changed his mind.  It actually didn't say he changed his mind.
So to keep the peace the BBC cut out those words.   

[Eleanor]

I agree it is easily construed that Martin Smith had changed his mind.  It actually didn't say he changed his mind.
So to keep the peace the BBC cut out those words.   

This is probably true.

[jassi]

The PJ didn't consider that the family were the investigation's most important witnesses - either because GM was placed elsewhere at the time or because there really, really was an abductor.

Remind me, when did the PJ receive the report pointing this out ?

[Wonderfulspam]

Thanks Misty.

Omega memo 08/09/08: "the SMITH family are now (and should always have been treated as) the investigation’s most important witnesses".

And what happened? 

As I recall, by September 08, the McCanns arguido status had been lifted, & they were far too busy saying prayers, lighting candles & suing newspapers to be wasting time chasing up the Smithman lead.

[misty]

Remind me, when did the PJ receive the report pointing this out ?

The PJ knew about the sighting in May 2007. Why would they have wanted or needed a report from a team of UK PI's to tell them what was important?

[Mr Gray]

If you bother to watch Panorama, you'll understand the context & notice that was the precise wording used.

Thanks.

(20:40)
https://youtu.be/Aq-1YrpZsuU

There is agood article in the guardian which gives the background to the panorama programme. The initial producer lookes at all the evidence and delivered a script that was critical of the pj and the press which led people to believe the mccanns may be guilty. The BBC would not accept this and the producer resigned ...they then went on to produce a programme that was far more critical of the mccanns. So far from suppressing evidence of the smith sighting the bbc supressed evidence of the mccanns innocence....seems that im a better investigative journalist than odowd

[Wonderfulspam]

There is agood article in the guardian which gives the background to the panorama programme. The initial producer lookes at all the evidence and delivered a script that was critical of the pj and the press which led people to believe the mccanns may be guilty. The BBC would not accept this and the producer resigned ...they then went on to produce a programme that was far more critical of the mccanns. So far from suppressing evidence of the smith sighting the bbc supressed evidence of the mccanns innocence....seems that im a better investigative journalist than odowd

That was the 2007 Panorama.

Congratulations.