UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: amaraltheofficeboy on May 07, 2013, 05:12:45 PM
-
I don't know the answer so I probably shouldn't ask, but anyway:
Did the PJ ever make a public appeal asking for the man carrying the child that Tanner said she saw, and the man carrying the child that Smith said he saw - to come forward?
You know - TV/radio appeals, local newspapers etc?
Crucial to eliminate innocent sightings.
-
I saw it confirmed somewhere in the files, but there's no launched appeal concerning the Smith carrier.
-
In spite of our having hundreds of pieces of information in our possession, we begin to realise that there is still some missing. At this time, everybody is aware of the theory of abduction. Residents and tourists present in Vila da Luz on the night of May 3rd have heard about this stranger who was allegedly seen, going around the streets, with a child in his arms. It wasn't ruled out that the man could be a local, quietly going home, carrying his sleeping child. On May 25th, then, we launched an appeal in the media: anyone having seen an individual corresponding to the description given by Jane Tanner should contact us. No one responded.
from GA's book
thanks for that.
22 days later.
Most holiday makers are on 7, 10 or 14 days holiday.
-
when was the first official missing poster of Madeleine issued by PJ at airports etc?
-
Appeal or not, no one came forward. And don't tell me that there is anyone in the World who doesn't know about this.
All of Portugal know, and so would anyone fortunate enough to be able to afford a holiday in Portugal.
-
In spite of our having hundreds of pieces of information in our possession, we begin to realise that there is still some missing. At this time, everybody is aware of the theory of abduction. Residents and tourists present in Vila da Luz on the night of May 3rd have heard about this stranger who was allegedly seen, going around the streets, with a child in his arms. It wasn't ruled out that the man could be a local, quietly going home, carrying his sleeping child. On May 25th, then, we launched an appeal in the media: anyone having seen an individual corresponding to the description given by Jane Tanner should contact us. No one responded.
from GA's book
thanks for that.
22 days later.
Most holiday makers are on 7, 10 or 14 days holiday.
Yes, if it was a national appeal you have a point, but what else could it have been, and the place was not only inhabitated by tourists. And not forgetting the Mccanns did appeals in the UK in May and June to holidaymakers there at the time, vast majority of which IIRC were British or Irish.
"On May 25th, then, we launched an appeal in the media ..."
That is, they did not consider Jane sighting until the Smiths made their statements ...
Heri.
-
Day out Heri, Smiths made their statements May 26
That is interesting ... but I think GA has the wrong date in his book. How can we confirm that media appeal?
Heri.
-
Day out Heri, Smiths made their statements May 26
Snort.
-
Day out Heri, Smiths made their statements May 26
That is interesting ... but I think GA has the wrong date in his book. How can we confirm that media appeal?
Heri.
By looking for it? of course do tell why you think the date is wrong
Ok, It is clear for me now ...
See this pages from the files (May 25th., pages 1593-1596)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1593.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1593.jpg)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1594.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1594.jpg)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1595.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1595.jpg)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1596.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1596.jpg)
May 25th. (pages 1593-1596) " ... venturing to suggest a press release, in fact an appeal to the person ..."
The Smiths made their formal statements on May 26th after arriving from Ireland, and after talking to the PJ before to arrange the date ... And this previous phone conversation, which obviously include the informal description of the man with the child, may explain which is written in pages 1593-1596 ... In other case it seems to be clarvoyance.
So PJ made the appeal after knowing about Smiths sighting.
Heri.
-
Perhaps the PJ were not ready to put out an appeal on the Smith sighting in just half or one day, hardly comparable to the Tanner sighting and testimony which they need a couple weeks for? dont know, if you think there is something rotten you should spit it out so everyone knows what you mean
Maybe, maybe, the Smiths saying the child had LONG SLEEVES on proves to them it couldnt be Madeleine as her parents said she had SHORT SLEEVES on, just a thought
Nothing rotten. I think PJ were busy at the time with Murat, Malinka and Michaela. And then, when the Smiths appeared on May 25th. or before (I have to check but I think it was May 23th.) ... they said: "like Jane Tanner sighting!" ... and they asked authorization for a press release ...
Heri.
-
they asked for authorisation for press release? Of who? tanner or Smith sighting?
Obviously you are answering without reading the info I submitted here before. PJ Files pages 1593-1596:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1593.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1593.jpg)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1594.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1594.jpg)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1595.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1595.jpg)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1596.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1596.jpg)
I would like to know what the rest of the people here think, but it is clear for me:
(1) PJ received an informal communication from the Smiths between May 23th. and May 25th., or even before (to be checked).
(2) PJ arranged a trip for the Smiths to Portugal to receive formal statements by them on May 26th.
(3) PJ did (2) because Smiths gave in advance a description which resembles Jane's description.
(4) So PJ had the info from the Smiths before asking for an authorisation to do a press realease with Jane Tanner sighting location and description (which resembles Smiths description).
(5) They used Jane's description because they had at the time Jane's formal statement, and not Smiths formal statement.
Heri.
-
they asked for authorisation for press release? Of who? tanner or Smith sighting?
Obviously you are answering without reading the info I submitted here before. PJ Files pages 1593-1596:
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1593.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1593.jpg)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1594.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1594.jpg)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1595.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1595.jpg)
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1596.jpg (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P6/06_VOLUME_VIa_Page_1596.jpg)
I would like to know what the rest of the people here think, but it is clear for me:
(1) PJ received an informal communication from the Smiths between May 23th. and May 25th., or even before (to be checked).
(2) PJ arranged a trip for the Smiths to Portugal to receive formal statements by them on May 26th.
(3) PJ did (2) because Smiths gave in advance a description which resembles Jane's description.
(4) So PJ had the info from the Smiths before asking for an authorisation to do a press realease with Jane Tanner sighting location and description (which resembles Smiths description).
(5) They used Jane's description because they had at the time Jane's formal statement, and not Smiths formal statement.
Heri.
Correct Heri. Then the next trip they cancelled, and decided the Smiths give rogatory statements, instead.
-
So no quick appeal for any men carrying children that night to come forward to be eliminated.
-
So no quick appeal for any men carrying children that night to come forward to be eliminated.
Not before the 25th. Remember the secret of investigation, the Ministério Publico is very clear : the appeal is launched in order to gather new informations that would eventually help corroborating or adding a new identity to the one already existing (Robert M).
-
what another opportunity missed.