Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?

[faithlilly]

We don't know do we
That is a fact... You speculated it was deliberate which I find ridiculous
We still do not have a direct quote from Mr smith

How do you think it happened then ?

[Carana]

there is a whole thread about it on the forum http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3550.msg134562#msg134562 "Who was the Irish teenager who saw Gerry and Jez talking?"

In this article it even gives the reason she doesn't mention it in her statement. http://www.anorak.co.uk/177197/reviews/madeleine-mccann-irish-teenger-saw-gerry-mcann.html/

The so-called ciggie incident is a Levy/ Reis special. IMO, it's fairly safe to discount it as ever happening. Along with the infamous "24 photos" and quite a few other "scoops" that never materialised for those of us old enough to remember.

[Mr Gray]

How do you think it happened then ?

I've no idea and I'm not particularly bothered as gerry is not a suspect in either investigation MS did not see Gerry McCann
Imo

[faithlilly]

I've no idea and I'm not particularly bothered as very is not a suspect in either investigation MS did not see Gerry McCann

MS certainly seems to be the main prop of this investigation now. Do you really think that some of his evidence would be taken seriously and the rest not ?

For me the fact that we were told that MS had retracted his identification TWICE without a word of truth in it speaks volumes.

[Brietta]

We don't know do we
That is a fact... You speculated it was deliberate which I find ridiculous
We still do not have a direct quote from Mr smith

Mr Smith doesn't seem to do direct quotes.

The edition of The Irish Mail on Sunday [Paper edition only] 10 August 2008 which reports on Mr Smith's addition to his statement of the previous year, Mrs Smith acting as family spokesperson is quoted as follows.

Snip
After making his statement, Mr Smith returned to Drogheda and it was not until four months later that that he made contact with the police again.

This weekend, Mr Smith's wife Mary told the Mail on Sunday her husband had no regrets about coming forward.

He [Martin] doesn't want to talk, said Mrs Smith. He said what he had to say. I was with him [that night]. We saw a man carrying a child and that's all we know. We told them all that and that's it.

''The man he saw had the same stature as Gerry McCann. We felt we had to help. We're happy we did. We reported exactly what we saw.

"We only did what we thought was right for a missing girl and our hearts are breaking for her parents, as it would be if it were one of ours.

''I feel very much for them [the McCanns]. I have six grandchildren of my own and six children of my own.

"The poor McCann family must be heartbroken.'
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/drogheda-businessman-told-police-he-saw-gerry-10-0-t8771.html


To me, that doesn't sound very much like a woman who harbours any doubts or misgivings about the innocence of the family of a missing child.

She was there at the time, she saw the man in question as did the others in the party.  In my opinion this is the source of Mr Smith's 'retraction' back in 2008 and if he didn't want it printed the remedy was in his own hands ... or mouth ... and that was to do his own talking.

Which brings me back to current events concerning Ms O'D ... has she produced provenance to back up the allegation she has made?
If not ~ in my opinion it smacks less of investigative journalism and more of muck raking ~ and my goodness, haven't we witnessed plenty of that as a result!

[G-Unit]

SY has found and cleared that man so have confirmed that Jane saw him carrying his 2 year old smaller than Madeleine child like she said.

Take a look at the timeline below. Russell got back at 9:55 - 5 minutes before Kate left to check and raise the alarm.

Russell actually got back at 9:45 - 10 minutes earlier so that would suggest Kate left at 9:50 to check which tally's with Matt's statement and the waiter who served Russell.

By the way, he clarifies that that news had been communicated to all the friends who were in the Tapas by Kate McCann subsequent to her having personally been to her flat to check that her children were well.
The question asked, he relates that she had gone there alone to do that at 21:50.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-10MAY.htm

The timeline is key in this case! Gerry's time of 9:15 is infact 9:05 according to him. Yet again a 10 minute discrepancy. You cannot hide the truth from me.

If the timeline isn't reliable we have a motive for suggesting that Mr Smith had changed his mind. In fact there are three defensive statements in the Sunday Times article;

Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry (1), and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility (2). Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects (3).

Number 1 was false.
Number 2 has no source.
Number 3 refers to the meeting on 17th October between the Met, the PJ and the McCanns. Their lawyer, Rogerio Alves is quoted.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-told-no-2592011#ixzz2txWqDdgE

[Mr Gray]

MS certainly seems to be the main prop of this investigation now. Do you really think that some of his evidence would be taken seriously and the rest not ?

For me the fact that we were told that MS had retracted his identification TWICE without a word of truth in it speaks volumes.

We know he saw a man carrying a child... That's all

[Mr Gray]

Is Smith 60 to 80 % sure it could have been Gerry or 60/80 it was Gerry... There's, a big difference

[Robittybob1]

SY has found and cleared that man so have confirmed that Jane saw him carrying his 2 year old smaller than Madeleine child like she said.

Take a look at the timeline below. Russell got back at 9:55 - 5 minutes before Kate left to check and raise the alarm.

Russell actually got back at 9:45 - 10 minutes earlier so that would suggest Kate left at 9:50 to check which tally's with Matt's statement and the waiter who served Russell.

By the way, he clarifies that that news had been communicated to all the friends who were in the Tapas by Kate McCann subsequent to her having personally been to her flat to check that her children were well.
The question asked, he relates that she had gone there alone to do that at 21:50.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-10MAY.htm

The timeline is key in this case! Gerry's time of 9:15 is infact 9:05 according to him. Yet again a 10 minute discrepancy. You cannot hide the truth from me.

If the two guys were walking past at different times or in different directions they are not the same person, so without that information I don't think you can be sure Tannerman has been identified fully.

[Robittybob1]

The so-called ciggie incident is a Levy/ Reis special. IMO, it's fairly safe to discount it as ever happening. Along with the infamous "24 photos" and quite a few other "scoops" that never materialised for those of us old enough to remember.

Did Amaral fall for it too then?

[Carana]

Did Amaral fall for it too then?

Not the ciggie incident, AFAIK.

Amaral did, however, did come out with a variety of versions of Mr Smith's degree of certainty and had a tendency to forget the later clarification that it was based on how the child was being held.

ETA: I've provided cites on Amaral's statements on this numerous times. Some might be in this thread:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2817.195

[G-Unit]

It can't be denied that Operation Grange found the Smith sighting worthy of their attention and used their evidence to change the time of a suspected abduction.

Others with no known experience of police work are suggesting that the Smith's evidence is neither reliable or important.

I do wish people would make their minds up. Are Operation Grange expert professionals who know better than we do or do they get things wrong?

[Robittybob1]

It can't be denied that Operation Grange found the Smith sighting worthy of their attention and used their evidence to change the time of a suspected abduction.

Others with no known experience of police work are suggesting that the Smith's evidence is neither reliable or important.

I do wish people would make their minds up. Are Operation Grange expert professionals who know better than we do or do they get things wrong?

I'm sure they would get somethings wrong in the short term.   Listen to the O Enigma video and try and say the police never get it wrong.

[misty]

It can't be denied that Operation Grange found the Smith sighting worthy of their attention and used their evidence to change the time of a suspected abduction.

Others with no known experience of police work are suggesting that the Smith's evidence is neither reliable or important.

I do wish people would make their minds up. Are Operation Grange expert professionals who know better than we do or do they get things wrong?

IMO it is best to pay attention to what DCI Redwood actually said in the Crimewatch 2013 programme, rather than the padding provided by the narrator. There was precious little detail provided in the programme about someone who could have been critical to the investigation.

[Mr Gray]

It can't be denied that Operation Grange found the Smith sighting worthy of their attention and used their evidence to change the time of a suspected abduction.

Others with no known experience of police work are suggesting that the Smith's evidence is neither reliable or important.

I do wish people would make their minds up. Are Operation Grange expert professionals who know better than we do or do they get things wrong?

You don't seem to understand... Imo
Smith saw smithman... Of that there is no doubt and is a useful lead... But it seems neither investigation believe it was Gerry he saw
It really is that simple