Each of the 3 links is relevant and interesting, so muito obrigado for these. You are also correct, that the total number of pages comes to well over 100 pages, and much of it is as convoluted as only a bureaucrat can be, so it was tough going at times.
For those posters responding that Gerry was 'identified' by Martin Smith by the way he was carrying Sean when he landed in Britain, please note the topic title is 'The Smithman e-fits', not how Martin 'clocked' Gerry.
The 3 links provided by Alice have nothing to do with 'carrying arrangements', as far as I can see. They are about police procedures, and of particular interest, how e-fits should be constructed.
The 3rd link is the shortest, the most relevant, and the easiest to read. Any Supporter worth his or her salt should be expending the energy to read that one at least.
Once again, many thanks Alice.
https://www.surrey.police.uk/policies-and-procedures/e-fit-procedure/1. the witness must have seen the front of the offenders face, (face to face).
2. If it is deemed that they can, an appointment will be made with the witness, ideally to take place within 72 hours dependant on witness availability etc. (e-fit should be done within 3 days of the sighting.)
This section on multiple witnesses is pertinent as there were many Smith family members.
"3. Multiple Witnesses
3.1 Where practicable, a different composite operator should be used for each witness to avoid cross-contamination of the images. (All witness details can be submitted on one request form per investigation to ensure this is complied with.)
3.2 Where there has been more than one witness to a single incident, each witness must be assessed individually on their ability to provide details from which an image could be produced.
3.3 Where more than one witness is able to describe what appears to be the same individual, accurately, composite images can be produced from each witness providing:
a. Each witness provides an individual image separately from other witnesses.
b. The witnesses do not work together in producing their own composite image and are not shown other composite images during the production of their own image.
3.4 Where more than one composite image is available and it is certain that they are of the same person, the OIC may consider that it is appropriate to either use the composite images singularly or in combination through circulations and appeals for identification.
3.5 Where there are multiple witnesses it may be appropriate to only complete one image with the most appropriate witness. This will be based on discussions with the OIC and initial assessment by the E-Fit operative.
3.6 A composite image produced from witnesses working together must not be attempted, as this will amount to cross-contamination of each witness' primary memory. "
There seems to be a real recognition of the production of false memories:
"9. Witness Contamination
9.1 Where a suspect is known to police a composite image must not be produced.
9.2 A witness or victim must not be shown photographs or be exposed to any form of identification procedure before being asked to produce a composite. This is to eliminate the risk or suggestion of contamination to the primary memory that could affect recall.
9.3 Consideration may be given to showing photographs after the production of a composite image as the process may enhance the chances of identification of a suspect.
Note. See R v VIRAG (1976), R v DOUGHERTY (1973) and Codes of Practice - Code D, Annex E.
9.4 Investigating officers must remember that any composite image created in accordance with this procedure must not be shown to any witnesses prior to an identification procedure. (Formally NPIA Facial Identification Guidance 2009.)"
