Neither are you, but if someone identified you as Smithman you'd need an alibi.
Very good point G-unit. I was thinking there would be hundreds of people who would struggle to have a hard alibi for an event minutes away from the 5A apartment. It is really unsolvable from that aspect for it is rather difficult to pin down the time of the alarm precisely. One with more precision than the time it would take for a man to walk from 5A to where Smithman was seen.
If we say it would take 5 minutes to get there and 5 minutes to do anything and 5 minutes to return, adding up to 15 minutes. We are then saying that it takes a minimum of 15 minutes to abduct Madeleine and to deposit her in some location near where the Smiths saw the man. Can every male around PdL provide a strong alibi for every 15 minute period between 9:45 and 10:15 that night. Or even a soft alibi if asked for an alibi. Robert Murat seems to be OK for he was at home with his mother, and his mother confirmed that.
But the emphasis came on RM at a time when Smithman was not even known about. We would really have to consider why it took 2 weeks for the Smiths to come forward and then only after RM was made a suspect.
Did Amaral and the PJ consider the Smith's sighting as a genuine event? In O Enigma he does, but that doesn't really count for it depends on what happened at the time. The PJ didn't drop RM's arguido status, can we read anything into that? No that 's alright for RM was more the Tannerman suspect and there is no real proof Tannerman and Smithman are one and the same person.
I get the feeling it is unsolvable from the point of view of alibis.
