The Smithman e-fits

[jassi]

I'm not following, Rob.

Was the only purpose of the Oakley efits to clear / eliminate RM?

Martin had stated ages ago that he didn't think it was him as he'd have recognised him.

If they help to make any potential witnesses think back to someone they may have seen at that time in that vicinity... even if the composite doesn't ring any bells, but the approximate time does... what's worthless about it?

Aside from those spamming police phone lines to insist that it was necessarily Gerry for the "fun" of it.

Was there really any solid evidence of that or was it just one of those myths?

[Robittybob1]

With out incriminating yourself Rob,on whose part?

I have only tonight found enough courage to say "corruption" but to define who is involved might take another year of figuring things out,  it is definitely complicated.
IMO I can tell it isn't right,  Amaral started blaming MI5 or something like that and got the sack.  He must have been thinking in terms of corruption too.
I'll have to try and understand his POV first.

I'm not following, Rob.

Was the only purpose of the Oakley efits to clear / eliminate RM?

Martin had stated ages ago that he didn't think it was him as he'd have recognised him.

If they help to make any potential witnesses think back to someone they may have seen at that time in that vicinity... even if the composite doesn't ring any bells, but the approximate time does... what's worthless about it?

Aside from those spamming police phone lines to insist that it was necessarily Gerry for the "fun" of it.

I feel a bit out on a limb, but Brietta said at some stage "the E-fits weren't worth the paper they were printed on".  I found that quite radical, for  now I'm in two mind as to whether the Smiths are pointing the finger at someone or not, and was it based on a face to face encounter with the target.  For it doesn't say that in their original PJ statements.  Did they make other statements for Oakley International?

I thought that the bone of contention was that he had 'retracted his statement'? Not quite the same thing.

Well we would have to read it again. Never "retracted his statement" or "Martin Smith never changed his mind about identifying Gerry McCann."  To me it is the second option from memory.  But it is too late for me to sort it now.

[Alice Purjorick]

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.

No problem.
Despite my caveat not many have arrived at the FACIAL ID / recognition definition by the police... . The clue, for those who fancy themselves as super sleuths, being FACIAL.
We still seem to be looking at "was he Henry Higgins the Matador rather than Ray Dorset of Mungo Gerry".
For those having led sheltered lives of blissful ignorance that is being more worried about who can be ID'd from buttons up the seams of his kecks rather than does have mutton chop sideboards.
[there is no suitable emoji to convey my thoughts on that!]

[Brietta]

No problem.
Despite my caveat not many have arrived at the FACIAL ID / recognition definition by the police... . The clue, for those who fancy themselves as super sleuths, being FACIAL.
We still seem to be looking at "was he Henry Higgins the Matador rather than Ray Dorset of Mungo Gerry".
For those having led sheltered lives of blissful ignorance that is being more worried about who can be ID'd from buttons up the seams of his kecks rather than does have mutton chop sideboards.
[there is no suitable emoji to convey my thoughts on that!]

Where does it say that Martin or Peter Smith were able to describe facial features? 

[Alice Purjorick]

Where does it say that Martin or Peter Smith were able to describe facial features?

Where did I say it did?
If they couldn't then by definition they were not the "authors" of what are being passed of as "e-fits".
There is a tendency furthermore to conflate "identification" and "e-fit".
But then I suspect you read the content of the links I posted, are well aware of the point I am making and trying  one of your customary body swerves in response...................[he said in gthe nicest kindest politest way possible].

[ShiningInLuz]

I find that last paragraph appalling,   you are hoping a search for a missing child is shut down soon,   so that you can talk to those who were mixed up in the investigation!!    Why?   so that you will have some news for your blog,   to bring a lot of hits?

Kindly see Robbity's posts regarding the reports.  It is clear he has worked through them to extract many of the salient details.

Please do not misrepresent my posts.  'Sooner rather than later' is quite different to 'soon'.

Alice appears to have worked out that the e-fits are flaky, and why.  Robbity appears to have worked out that the e-fits are flaky, and why.

This level of incompetence is duplicated in other actions by Operation Grange.

I knew before Alice's post that the e-fits were flaky, because I have seen the original scientific research papers to prove it.  But I could only assume that OG knew they were flaky.  With Alice's paper showing that Surrey police knew such e-fits would be flaky, I am now confident that OG knew they were flaky, before they published them.

So Crimewatch 2013 becomes a farce.  Crecheman going the wrong way.  Dodgy e-fits.  £11 million and counting.

The only wise decision I can think of is that DCI Nicola Wall rapidly moved to other investigations.

Please do not attribute motive to my posts in future, otherwise I will report such a post as being in breach of the forum rules, and let the mods decide.

[Carana]

Kindly see Robbity's posts regarding the reports.  It is clear he has worked through them to extract many of the salient details.

Please do not misrepresent my posts.  'Sooner rather than later' is quite different to 'soon'.

Alice appears to have worked out that the e-fits are flaky, and why.  Robbity appears to have worked out that the e-fits are flaky, and why.

This level of incompetence is duplicated in other actions by Operation Grange.

I knew before Alice's post that the e-fits were flaky, because I have seen the original scientific research papers to prove it.  But I could only assume that OG knew they were flaky.  With Alice's paper showing that Surrey police knew such e-fits would be flaky, I am now confident that OG knew they were flaky, before they published them.

So Crimewatch 2013 becomes a farce.  Crecheman going the wrong way.  Dodgy e-fits.  £11 million and counting.

The only wise decision I can think of is that DCI Nicola Wall rapidly moved to other investigations.

Please do not attribute motive to my posts in future, otherwise I will report such a post as being in breach of the forum rules, and let the mods decide.

Not sure what you mean by flaky. In terms of what?

[barrier]

What did have SY to lose?  Where should I start?

Roughly speaking, absolutely everything.

There is a part of me that hopes this farce shuts down sooner, rather than later, so that I can go and talk to some of those who got flame-griddled over this nonsense, so they can have their say, without breaking the law in Portugal.

Don't let that get in the way,it didn't stop Bilton.

[ShiningInLuz]

Not sure what you mean by flaky. In terms of what?

Perhaps you are unable to understand that Surrey Police guidelines are that e-fits are made within 72 hours, while the Smitman e-fits are dated to September 2008, some 16 months out of date.

That's flaky, and OG knew it.

Oddly enough, we have just been discussing BBE dates on the Algarve, as a product we purchased from Baptistas was 6 moths past its BBE date.  That went straight in the bin.

That's where the e-fits should have gone, except they were publicised in Portugal with the narrative that this was SY's new main suspect.

 

[G-Unit]

Perhaps you are unable to understand that Surrey Police guidelines are that e-fits are made within 72 hours, while the Smitman e-fits are dated to September 2008, some 16 months out of date.

That's flaky, and OG knew it.

Oddly enough, we have just been discussing BBE dates on the Algarve, as a product we purchased from Baptistas was 6 moths past its BBE date.  That went straight in the bin.

That's where the e-fits should have gone, except they were publicised in Portugal with the narrative that this was SY's new main suspect.

 

I have wondered about Crimewatch 2013 a few times. One thing I noticed was that the PJ announced the reopening of their investigation immediately after the programme was shown.

[John]

I have wondered about Crimewatch 2013 a few times. One thing I noticed was that the PJ announced the reopening of their investigation immediately after the programme was shown.

It astounds how Redwood managed to maintain a straight face when he introduced 5-year-old e-fits as some revelation?

[Robittybob1]

Where did I say it did?
If they couldn't then by definition they were not the "authors" of what are being passed of as "e-fits".
There is a tendency furthermore to conflate "identification" and "e-fit".
But then I suspect you read the content of the links I posted, are well aware of the point I am making and trying  one of your customary body swerves in response...................[he said in gthe nicest kindest politest way possible].

Have Martin Smith or Peter Smith ever admitted they were the authors of the E-fits? 
I am wondering if we aren't all being scammed by Kevin Halligen.
Kevin Halligan worked in Northern Ireland.  Was there a connection between the Smiths and Halligen?
 

[John]

Have Martin Smith or Peter Smith ever admitted they were the authors of the E-fits? 
I am wondering if we aren't all being scammed by Richard Halligen.

Do you think he made them up?

[Brietta]

The Crimewatch programme did indeed concentrate minds wonderfully

• deflecting attention from the person Jane Tanner saw
• and altering the timeline to encompass the Smith sighting

Maybe that is the 'double blind' we armchair detectives should have been paying attention to as opposed to any other.

Added to the mix was the Sunday Times revelation about the efits which have now been classed as 'flaky' by some of our members.
Now the thought about that is ... was that by accident as some seem to think ... or was it by design as those of us who pointed out that important caveat of 'almost'.
Was the expensive (for the Sunday times) Oakley revelation opportune in extending the charade whether by accident or design?

It all rather kept internet minds concentrated wonderfully in a variety of ways while Scotland Yard and the Policia Judiciaria may very well have been doing the day job and tracking Madeleine and investigating suspects who may have had their eye taken off the ball as they contentedly posted morphing images of Smithman and a significant other.
What was painted on the wall in Luz?  Maybe the English cops aren't as stupid as seemed to be believed.

[John]

The Crimewatch programme did indeed concentrate minds wonderfully

• deflecting attention from the person Jane Tanner saw
• and altering the timeline to encompass the Smith sighting

Maybe that is the 'double blind' we armchair detectives should have been paying attention to as opposed to any other.

Added to the mix was the Sunday Times revelation about the efits which have now been classed as 'flaky' by some of our members.
Now the thought about that is ... was that by accident as some seem to think ... or was it by design as those of us who pointed out that important caveat of 'almost'.
Was the expensive (for the Sunday times) Oakley revelation opportune in extending the charade whether by accident or design?

It all rather kept internet minds concentrated wonderfully in a variety of ways while Scotland Yard and the Policia Judiciaria may very well have been doing the day job and tracking Madeleine and investigating suspects who may have had their eye taken off the ball as they contentedly posted morphing images of Smithman and a significant other.
What was painted on the wall in Luz?  Maybe the English cops aren't as stupid as seemed to be believed.

You mean the "The Parents Killed Maddie" and the "English Police Are Stupid" graffiti?





Two Scotland Yard officers walk past grafitti claiming the "English Police Are Stupid".