Author Topic: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?  (Read 70944 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #510 on: February 09, 2018, 06:45:22 PM »
MS was asked to go back again in Sept. '07.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

*snipped*

Processos Vol XI Page 2875

Policia Judiciaria

NUIPC 201-070 GALGS

NOTE

On this date I state for the files that at about 12.12 I had telephone contact with the witness Martin Smith, by means of phone number ********* who referred to the communication he made on 20-09-2007 to the British authorities, that confirms his sighting and showing his full availability to travel to Portugal with the aim of making statements and collaborating with this police in all the diligences that could be considered necessary concerning these events.

Portimao, 27th September 2007

Signed

Inspector Paiva
So was Martin Smith the only one of the Smiths being returned to Portugal for this exercise?  4 of the Smiths made statements didn't they.
Think of the Tapas 9 and Jez, Gerry and Kate agree to return, but the rest proved more difficult to round up.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2018, 07:44:23 PM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline misty

Re: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #511 on: February 09, 2018, 07:49:37 PM »
Who's hand writing was JW statement if he "insisted on handwriting his own witness statement"?  Is it his or the interviewing police officer?

My mistake - it would appear to be the interviewing officer's handwriting. I thought I remembered reading somewhere that JW had insisted on handwriting his own statement.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #512 on: February 09, 2018, 08:11:01 PM »
My mistake - it would appear to be the interviewing officer's handwriting. I thought I remembered reading somewhere that JW had insisted on handwriting his own statement.
There was that, but I think it just meant it wasn't to be recorded by video or tape recording.  OK the witness has the right but hand written statements are inferior.  There are sections in there that can't be read and mistakes are made.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #513 on: February 09, 2018, 11:25:58 PM »
MS was asked to go back again in Sept. '07.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

*snipped*

Processos Vol XI Page 2875

Policia Judiciaria

NUIPC 201-070 GALGS

NOTE

On this date I state for the files that at about 12.12 I had telephone contact with the witness Martin Smith, by means of phone number ********* who referred to the communication he made on 20-09-2007 to the British authorities, that confirms his sighting and showing his full availability to travel to Portugal with the aim of making statements and collaborating with this police in all the diligences that could be considered necessary concerning these events.

Portimao, 27th September 2007

Signed

Inspector Paiva

Sorry the cite you post says the the Smith said they could return, not that they were asked to?
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

Offline misty

Re: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #514 on: February 09, 2018, 11:38:12 PM »
Sorry the cite you post says the the Smith said they could return, not that they were asked to?

Which part of this should be added to the list of half-truths?

http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Amaral%20The%20Truth%20of%20the%20Lie%20Chapter%2020

snipped from Chapter 20

We decide to get the Smiths back to the Algarve, for a formal identification of Gerry McCann - by means of televised images, certainly - direct confrontation being impossible - and possibly proceed to a reconstruction of the events of the night of May 3rd. The National Director of the Judiciary police agrees, the process is set in motion, all the details are sorted out; all that remains is to choose the hotel where they will be put up. But the Smiths were never to come back to Portugal. After my departure, the PJ were to change their minds. They asked the Irish police to proceed with interviewing the witness.

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #515 on: February 09, 2018, 11:49:35 PM »
Which part of this should be added to the list of half-truths?

http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Amaral%20The%20Truth%20of%20the%20Lie%20Chapter%2020

snipped from Chapter 20

We decide to get the Smiths back to the Algarve, for a formal identification of Gerry McCann - by means of televised images, certainly - direct confrontation being impossible - and possibly proceed to a reconstruction of the events of the night of May 3rd. The National Director of the Judiciary police agrees, the process is set in motion, all the details are sorted out; all that remains is to choose the hotel where they will be put up. But the Smiths were never to come back to Portugal. After my departure, the PJ were to change their minds. They asked the Irish police to proceed with interviewing the witness.

No where in what you post does it say the Smiths were asked to return?
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

Offline misty

Re: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #516 on: February 10, 2018, 12:07:29 AM »
No where in what you post does it say the Smiths were asked to return?

So you think they made all the arrangements, bar the hotel, without asking the Smith(s) first?

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #517 on: February 10, 2018, 04:59:30 AM »
There is now a searchable transcript (i.e. text) of Gemma O'Doherty's article in Village Magazine appearing on my blog.  Did the BBC bend the truth?

This transcript is intended for research purposes only.

If I get a complaint from Gemma O'Doherty or Village Magazine I will remove it.

For the avoidance of doubt, I have been withholding this transcript for days.  I am of the opinion that publishing the text now will not adversely impact the circulation of Village Magazine.
What's up, old man?

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #518 on: February 10, 2018, 05:24:57 AM »
There is now a searchable transcript (i.e. text) of Gemma O'Doherty's article in Village Magazine appearing on my blog.  Did the BBC bend the truth?

This transcript is intended for research purposes only.

If I get a complaint from Gemma O'Doherty or Village Magazine I will remove it.

For the avoidance of doubt, I have been withholding this transcript for days.  I am of the opinion that publishing the text now will not adversely impact the circulation of Village Magazine.
I'd better copy it before it gets deleted!
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #519 on: February 10, 2018, 06:20:04 AM »
Who is offering the reward of 20,000 Pounds?

"A reward of £20,000 was offered to anyone who could assist with the investigation"   Would it still be available?

Since the Smiths have provided the E-fits how come they haven't been given the reward?

If I had the resources this is how I would tackle this issue:

peter Smith met the son of the builder who knew about the missing girl the next morning.

Find out how he (the son of the builder) got to know about this, ask him if he recalls speaking to Peter about it.  What did Peter say in response?

« Last Edit: February 10, 2018, 06:28:20 AM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Brietta

Re: Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #520 on: February 10, 2018, 08:28:07 AM »
There is now a searchable transcript (i.e. text) of Gemma O'Doherty's article in Village Magazine appearing on my blog.  Did the BBC bend the truth?

This transcript is intended for research purposes only.

If I get a complaint from Gemma O'Doherty or Village Magazine I will remove it.

For the avoidance of doubt, I have been withholding this transcript for days.  I am of the opinion that publishing the text now will not adversely impact the circulation of Village Magazine.

John approved links to your blog some time ago so I am posting one to accompany the above post. 

https://shininginluz.wordpress.com/
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline G-Unit

Re: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #521 on: February 10, 2018, 10:07:13 AM »
Sorry the cite you post says the the Smith said they could return, not that they were asked to?

On this date I state for the files that at about 12.12 I had telephone contact with the witness Martin Smith, by means of phone number ********* who referred to the communication he made on 20-09-2007 to the British authorities, that confirms his sighting and showing his full availability to travel to Portugal with the aim of making statements and collaborating with this police in all the diligences that could be considered necessary concerning these events.

Portimao, 27th September 2007

Signed

Inspector Paiva
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline G-Unit

Re: Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #522 on: February 10, 2018, 10:25:40 AM »
John approved links to your blog some time ago so I am posting one to accompany the above post. 

https://shininginluz.wordpress.com/

How strange! A thread was deleted not long ago because there was a link to SIL's blog. Something about links to blogs written by members being against the rules, if I remember correctly. but apologies if I've got that wrong.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2018, 10:36:50 AM by G-Unit »
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Carana

Re: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #523 on: February 10, 2018, 10:34:36 AM »
On this date I state for the files that at about 12.12 I had telephone contact with the witness Martin Smith, by means of phone number ********* who referred to the communication he made on 20-09-2007 to the British authorities, that confirms his sighting and showing his full availability to travel to Portugal with the aim of making statements and collaborating with this police in all the diligences that could be considered necessary concerning these events.

Portimao, 27th September 2007

Signed

Inspector Paiva
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

Open to interpretation, no doubt, but I understand that as an informal enquiry as to whether he'd be willing / available to go over possibly prior to a formal request, unless there wasn't going to be a more formal one and he'd just be asked to pop over on a certain date.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Why Were We Lied to By the BBC ?
« Reply #524 on: February 10, 2018, 11:05:23 AM »
Open to interpretation, no doubt, but I understand that as an informal enquiry as to whether he'd be willing / available to go over possibly prior to a formal request, unless there wasn't going to be a more formal one and he'd just be asked to pop over on a certain date.

No consultations with lawyers or reassurances for Martin Smith. He seems simply to have wanted to help the PJ to find a missing child. How different his behaviour was to those closest to the child.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?