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: Alfred R Jones on April 26, 2015, 06:20:53 PM
Title: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 26, 2015, 06:20:53 PM
There is a prevailing view amongst the "sceptic" community that the McCanns are uncomfortable with the Smithman e-fits as revealed on the Crimewatch programme in October 2013. I pointed out on another thread that the OFM FB page featured these e-fits 7 times and these posts received 75,000 shares. There is also a button on the OFM FB page entitled "watch video" which links to the Crimewatch appeal that some "sceptics" are convinced is the McCanns least favourite programme as it features them sitting on a sofa looking uncomfortable as Redwood "decimates" JT's sighting and introduces us to the Smithman e-fits (which many sceptics are convinced look exactly like Gerry).
So what's the evidence to suggest that the McCanns actively distance themselves from the Smithman e-fits? Let's have it here please...
[Edited slightly]
266
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2015, 06:57:32 PM
Right. So the fact that their far more active FB page has given significant emphasis to the Smithman e-fits is completely outweighed by the lack of them on the tumbleweed OFM website is it...? &%+((£
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly2.1 on April 26, 2015, 07:03:19 PM
I no way endorse the following story, but it is interestingly linked to this thread:
CM (presumably), 28th October 2013, on a Daily Mail story entitled: 'Why were Maddie suspect E-fits kept SECRET for five years? Images and evidence of sighting uncovered by private detectives were suppressed.'
"A source close to the fund said the report would have been ‘completely distracting’ if it had become public." Written by DM journalist NS.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly2.1 on April 26, 2015, 07:09:34 PM
So at least according to the source in the Mail, we can summarise that that such a person who was the source was afraid of the investigation being 'distracting' to the pursuit of the JT sighting which Andy is now "almost certain" wasn't as it was first argued.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2015, 07:10:09 PM
The official tumble weed site was updated after CW, but not to add the E-fits.... funnily enough.
Instead Redwoods revelation was spun.
Fancy that.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 26, 2015, 07:11:45 PM
There is a prevailing view amongst the "sceptic" community that the McCanns are uncomfortable with the Smithman e-fits as revealed on the Crimewatch programme in October 2013. I pointed out on another thread that the OFM FB page featured these e-fits 7 times and these posts received 75,000 shares. There is also a button on the OFM FB page entitled "watch video" which links to the Crimewatch appeal that some "sceptics" are convinced is the McCanns least favourite programme as it features them sitting on a sofa looking uncomfortable as Redwood "decimates" JT's sighting and introduces us to the Smithman e-fits (which many sceptics are convinced look exactly like Gerry).
So what's the evidence to suggest that the McCanns actively distance themselves from the Smithman e-fits? Let's have it here please...
Wrong question Alfie. The right question is: Why by May 2009 had they only publicly acknowledged the family's claim once (and that single occasion was in response to newspaper publicity, it wasn't generated by M3-Mitchell).
The efits are just theatrics.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 26, 2015, 08:46:43 PM
Wrong question Alfie. The right question is: Why by May 2009 had they only publicly acknowledged the family's claim once (and that single occasion was in response to newspaper publicity, it wasn't generated by M3-Mitchell).
The efits are just theatrics.
Whose theatrics?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on April 26, 2015, 08:49:50 PM
And they would choose to link to the dreaded Crimewatch programme with a permanent "watch video" button because...?
The question should be why are the efits not pinned in a prominent position at the top of the OFM FB page ? Is some cliched quote about hope really more important than the efits of a man SY say may have abducted their daughter ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 26, 2015, 10:06:01 PM
The question should be why are the efits not pinned in a prominent position at the top of the OFM FB page ? Is some cliched quote about hope really more important than the efits of a man SY say may have abducted their daughter ?
Is a cliched quote about hope pinned in a prominent position at the top of the OFM page?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on April 26, 2015, 10:12:48 PM
Is a cliched quote about hope pinned in a prominent position at the top of the OFM page?
No at the moment we have some nonsense quote from a Daily Express ( a newspaper that the McCanns sued ) churnalist, so infinitely worse than a cliched quote.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on April 26, 2015, 10:31:11 PM
No at the moment we have some nonsense quote from a Daily Express ( a newspaper that the McCanns sued ) churnalist, so infinitely worse than a cliched quote.
Ah, so you're talking about the cover photo which features an age progression picture of Madeleine with the headline please don't give up on Madeleine? And you think this is a less valid cover photo than a pair of e-fits? as far as I'm aware the OFM FB page has never used e-fits of any suspects as its cover photo, but I think the fact that there is a button which features ON the cover photo saying "watch video" which links to the Met's last appeal on Crimewatch tends to suggest that the McCanns are not afraid of what was revealed on that programme - what say you?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 26, 2015, 10:44:39 PM
I think it shows concern that they are not misrepresented and that reports are thoroughly researched and accurate before going to print.
Yes I think the issue was that the whole of Mitchell's comment wasn't printed?
Any paper in the land would have given him as much space as he wanted to say whatever he wished about the issue, but instead of doing that they chose to go to court.
Consequently we still don't know what he had to say. Why not just say it?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on April 26, 2015, 10:54:16 PM
Ah, so you're talking about the cover photo which features an age progression picture of Madeleine with the headline please don't give up on Madeleine? And you think this is a less valid cover photo than a pair of e-fits? as far as I'm aware the OFM FB page has never used e-fits of any suspects as its cover photo, but I think the fact that there is a button which features ON the cover photo saying "watch video" which links to the Met's last appeal on Crimewatch tends to suggest that the McCanns are not afraid of what was revealed on that programme - what say you?
Do I think an age progressed picture which features elsewhere on the page is a less valid cover photo than the efits of a man who it seems SY think more than likely abducted your daughter yes I do.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on April 26, 2015, 11:05:09 PM
Do I think an age progressed picture which features elsewhere on the page is a less valid cover photo than the efits of a man who it seems SY think more than likely abducted your daughter yes I do.
So it's your opinion versus theirs - as we are constantly being told on this forum all opinions are equally valid. You still haven't addressed the thorny subject of why the McCanns would ask you to watch a video which linked to a programme that was allegedly full of information they had wanted to suppress and were terrified of, but no matter - I can live without your feeble reasoning on that subject. 8((()*/
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on April 26, 2015, 11:13:13 PM
So it's your opinion versus theirs - as we are constantly being told on this forum all opinions are equally valid. You still haven't addressed the thorny subject of why the McCanns would ask you to watch a video which linked to a programme that was allegedly full of information they had wanted to suppress and were terrified of, but no matter - I can live without your feeble reasoning on that subject. 8((()*/
So why not display the efits prominently so the first thing people see when visiting the page is them ? If you truly want your daughter to be found surely the efits of man who it seems SY think abducted her should be centre stage instead of behind a video button which gives no details of what the video is about ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 26, 2015, 11:22:50 PM
But they took action against the Sunday Times article didn't they. That shows there is concern about the story behind the e-fits.
I thought DCI Andy said the efits had never been shown to the public before and the ST went one step further by suggesting they had been deliberately withheld by the McCanns. This being a bit of a dumb thing to say was the catalyst for the action. In the final analysis the efits had not been shown to the public before DCI Andy held them up on CW. Now they are not easy to find for whatever reason. Seems to me a bit like "The Contract must be advertised in the press" and it appears only in The Biggleswade Chronicle...... if you follow the drift.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 26, 2015, 11:29:17 PM
So why not display the efits prominently so the first thing people see when visiting the page is them ? If you truly want your daughter to be found surely the efits of man who it seems SY think abducted her should be centre stage instead of behind a video button which gives no details of what the video is about ?
If you visited the Official Find Madeleine FB page and saw a button saying "Watch Video", what do you think the video would be about? A youtube clip of the Great British Bake Off? It is there permanently pointing all visitors to the page to the most recent appeal by the Met. Where incidentally are the photofits on Operation Grange's own website page?
OFM has posted the Smithman e-fit pictures on 7 separate occasions, receiving 75,000 shares with a reach of god knows how many million. If you think this is evidence that the McCanns are scared of the e-fits then frankly I think you're bonkers. Good night. 6&%5%
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on April 26, 2015, 11:39:08 PM
If you visited the Official Find Madeleine FB page and saw a button saying "Watch Video", what do you think the video would be about? A youtube clip of the Great British Bake Off? It is there permanently pointing all visitors to the page to the most recent appeal by the Met. Where incidentally are the photofits on Operation Grange's own website page?
OFM has posted the Smithman e-fit pictures on 7 separate occasions, receiving 75,000 shares with a reach of god knows how many million. If you think this is evidence that the McCanns are scared of the e-fits then frankly I think you're bonkers. Good night. 6&%5%
You still haven't give a reason why you think the efits aren't located more prominently. Maybe a good nights sleep will help. Careful the bugs don't bite Alfie.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on April 26, 2015, 11:41:12 PM
If you visited the Official Find Madeleine FB page and saw a button saying "Watch Video", what do you think the video would be about? A youtube clip of the Great British Bake Off? It is there permanently pointing all visitors to the page to the most recent appeal by the Met. Where incidentally are the photofits on Operation Grange's own website page?
OFM has posted the Smithman e-fit pictures on 7 separate occasions, receiving 75,000 shares with a reach of god knows how many million. If you think this is evidence that the McCanns are scared of the e-fits then frankly I think you're bonkers. Good night. 6&%5%
&%+((£ The 'Watch Our Video' link doesn't work?
E-fits aren't on the updates page, and not on the index page now either.
Where are they?
(Crimewatch 2013 is missed off the updates page altogether. That I'm not surprised about.)
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on April 26, 2015, 11:43:02 PM
I thought DCI Andy said the efits had never been shown to the public before and the ST went one step further by suggesting they had been deliberately withheld by the McCanns. This being a bit of a dumb thing to say was the catalyst for the action. In the final analysis the efits had not been shown to the public before DCI Andy held them up on CW. Now they are not easy to find for whatever reason. Seems to me a bit like "The Contract must be advertised in the press" and it appears only in The Biggleswade Chronicle...... if you follow the drift.
I follow your drift Alice. It's all, to borrow a phrase, a little bit odd.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 26, 2015, 11:44:15 PM
It looks like we are back to same three suspects: The guy DCI Andy greased. The spotty geezer with the Gene Vincent hairstyle. The Julie Driscoll lookylikey. Curiouser and curiouser
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 27, 2015, 01:05:41 AM
Seems it is a fact that the Mccanns had efits of Smithman for "years" and "never" published them on their website(s)
That is wierd at best
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 08:06:07 AM
There is a prevailing view amongst the "sceptic" community that the McCanns are uncomfortable with the Smithman e-fits as revealed on the Crimewatch programme in October 2013. I pointed out on another thread that the OFM FB page featured these e-fits 7 times and these posts received 75,000 shares. There is also a button on the OFM FB page entitled "watch video" which links to the Crimewatch appeal that some "sceptics" are convinced is the McCanns least favourite programme as it features them sitting on a sofa looking uncomfortable as Redwood "decimates" JT's sighting and introduces us to the Smithman e-fits (which many sceptics are convinced look exactly like Gerry).
So what's the evidence to suggest that the McCanns actively distance themselves from the Smithman e-fits? Let's have it here please...
[Edited slightly]
Let's face it, the e-fits had similarities with Gerry but then it has been pointed out they also have similarities with other characters involved in this case.
To remind readers of the facts. Irish tourist Martin Smith holidaying in Praia da Luz with his family encountered a man carrying a young girl in his arms about the same time as Madeleine was found to be missing. He never thought anything more of the casual encounter even after learning of the disappearance but when he watched a TV news item months later which included footage of Kate and Gerry McCann returning home to the UK he contacted his local Guarda office. He went on to make a statement to his local police in which he claimed that the vision of Gerry carrying one of the twins down the aircraft steps had a striking resemblance to the man he had encountered many months previously in Praia da Luz. Other members of the extended family were not similarly convinced. Mr Smith and at least two other members of his family later returned to Portugal and were interviewed by Portuguese detectives. There is no record of any e-fit or artists impression being provided at this point in time.
The Smiths were later approached by McCann supporter Brian Kennedy to provide e-fits but these were not provided until fellow Irishman Kevin Halligen, founder of Oakley International, got involved. At least two e-fits of the man they encountered that night in Praia da Luz were created, e-fits which bare a fleeting resemblance to Gerry McCann.
The e-fits were passed to police some months afterwards but were never released to the public until 2013 inevitably creating the suggestion that they had been withheld due to the likeness. Sceptics argue that refusing to release the e-fits damaged the worldwide search for Madeleine, a charge which the McCanns themselves have consistently laid at the door of former Portuguese coordinator Gonçalo Amaral.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on April 27, 2015, 12:38:26 PM
Let's face it, the e-fits had similarities with Gerry but then it has been pointed out they also have similarities with other characters involved in this case.
To remind readers of the facts. Irish tourist Martin Smith holidaying in Praia da Luz with his family encountered a man carrying a young girl in his arms about the same time as Madeleine was found to be missing. He never thought anything more of the casual encounter even after learning of the disappearance but when he watched a TV news item months later which included footage of Kate and Gerry McCann returning home to the UK he contacted his local Guarda office. He went on to make a statement to his local police in which he claimed that the vision of Gerry carrying one of the twins down the aircraft steps had a striking resemblance to the man he had encountered many months previously in Praia da Luz. Other members of the extended family were not similarly convinced. Mr Smith and at least two other members of his family later returned to Portugal and were interviewed by Portuguese detectives. There is no record of any e-fit or artists impression being provided at this point in time.
The Smiths were later approached by McCann supporter Brian Kennedy to provide e-fits but these were not provided until fellow Irishman Kevin Halligen, founder of Oakley International, got involved. At least two e-fits of the man they encountered that night in Praia da Luz were created, e-fits which bare a fleeting resemblance to Gerry McCann.
The e-fits were passed to police some months afterwards but were never released to the public until 2013 inevitably creating the suggestion that they had been withheld due to the likeness. Sceptics argue that refusing to release the e-fits damaged the worldwide search for Madeleine, a charge which the McCanns themselves have consistently laid at the door of former Portuguese coordinator Gonçalo Amaral.
Isn't that the case with most efits? They match dozens if not hundreds of people, though most can be excluded on the grounds of being nowhere near at the time of the event.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: John on April 27, 2015, 12:44:32 PM
Isn't that the case with most efits? They match dozens if not hundreds of people, though most can be excluded on the grounds of being nowhere near at the time of the event.
Quite so Jassi. The mystery surrounding the refusal to publish the e-fits timeously is rightly an enduring one. Private investigators go to the trouble and expense to have e-fits provided of a mystery man who could very well hold the key to Madeleine's disappearance, subsequently confirmed by DCI Redwood on Crimewatch yet the public never saw these e-fits for 5 years and even now the FM website gives them no prominence. Is there any wonder people are sceptical?
From the Sunday Times article of 27 October 2013...
The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.
He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.
“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.
A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.
It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: lordpookles on April 27, 2015, 12:46:06 PM
Both efits reassemble Gerry in different ways imo. It's right to say they also look like others connected to the case. For me one of the efits look a lot like Matthew Oldfield. Who else connected to the case do these efits resemble?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on April 27, 2015, 12:49:13 PM
Let's face it, the e-fits had similarities with Gerry but then it has been pointed out they also have similarities with other characters involved in this case.
To remind readers of the facts. Irish tourist Martin Smith holidaying in Praia da Luz with his family encountered a man carrying a young girl in his arms about the same time as Madeleine was found to be missing. He never thought anything more of the casual encounter even after learning of the disappearance but when he watched a TV news item months later which included footage of Kate and Gerry McCann returning home to the UK he contacted his local Guarda office. He went on to make a statement to his local police in which he claimed that the vision of Gerry carrying one of the twins down the aircraft steps had a striking resemblance to the man he had encountered many months previously in Praia da Luz. Other members of the extended family were not similarly convinced. Mr Smith and at least two other members of his family later returned to Portugal and were interviewed by Portuguese detectives. There is no record of any e-fit or artists impression being provided at this point in time.
The Smiths were later approached by McCann supporter Brian Kennedy to provide e-fits but these were not provided until fellow Irishman Kevin Halligen, founder of Oakley International, got involved. At least two e-fits of the man they encountered that night in Praia da Luz were created, e-fits which bare a fleeting resemblance to Gerry McCann.
The e-fits were passed to police some months afterwards but were never released to the public until 2013 inevitably creating the suggestion that they had been withheld due to the likeness. Sceptics argue that refusing to release the e-fits damaged the worldwide search for Madeleine, a charge which the McCanns themselves have consistently laid at the door of former Portuguese coordinator Gonçalo Amaral.
I'm really not exercising any pro McCann bias here ... but I really see no resemblance to Dr Gerry McCann despite being subjected to the efit image morphing into him continually on at least one forum.
Based on what I know of Halligan I would tend not to place reliance on a word that exits his mouth.
I cannot conceive how the Smiths were able to provide detailed efits many months down the line of a man they saw for seconds and could not describe at the time.
It is worth bearing in mind that in line with Richard McCluskey ... Martin Smith 'recognised' the way the child was being carried ... he did not mention facial features to which he was exposed almost on a daily basis.
I think the McCanns know exactly the significance of these efits and I think they will therefore be relaxed about them.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: John on April 27, 2015, 01:04:28 PM
Police were calling the release of these images a "vital development" in October 2013 so why did it take almost 6 years to get there?
DCI Andy Redwood, who is leading the investigation said: "We have now had over 730 calls and 212 emails as a direct result of the specific lines of enquiry we issued yesterday concerning events in the lead up to, and on the night of Thursday 3rd May 2007 when Madeleine was abducted.
DCI Andy Redwood, who is leading the investigation said: "We have now had over 730 calls and 212 emails as a direct result of the specific lines of enquiry we issued yesterday concerning events in the lead up to, and on the night of Thursday 3rd May 2007 when Madeleine was abducted.
Quite so Jassi. The mystery surrounding the refusal to publish the e-fits timeously is rightly an enduring one. Private investigators go to the trouble and expense to have e-fits provided of a mystery man who could very well hold the key to Madeleine's disappearance, subsequently confirmed by DCI Redwood on Crimewatch yet the public never saw these e-fits for 5 years and even now the FM website gives them no prominence. Is there any wonder people are sceptical?
From the Sunday Times article of 27 October 2013...
The McCann fund source said the Oakley report was passed on to new private investigators after the contract ended, but that the firm’s work was considered “contaminated” by the financial dispute.
He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors.
“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . It just wouldn’t be conducive to the investigation to have that report publicly declared because . . . the newspapers would have been all over it. And it would have been completely distracting,” said the source.
A statement released by the Find Madeleine fund said that “all information privately gathered during the search for Madeleine has been fully acted upon where necessary” and had been passed to Scotland Yard.
It continued: “Throughout the investigation, the Find Madeleine fund’s sole priority has been, and remains, to find Madeleine and bring her home as swiftly as possible.”
“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . Erm... we could speculate until the cows come home who "those involved" may be. "Involved" in what? The disappearance or in the investigation more generally?
The fact is that the report hasn't been made public, and therefore the insinuations in that article can't be critically examined.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: John on April 27, 2015, 02:36:56 PM
“[The report] was hypercritical of the people involved . . . Erm... we could speculate until the cows come home who "those involved" may be. "Involved" in what? The disappearance or in the investigation more generally?
The fact is that the report hasn't been made public, and therefore the insinuations in that article can't be critically examined.
Why has the Report never been made public? Is it a case, as I have suspected for some time, that there is a lot of cherry picking going on in this case and any information which could take the lustre off the McCanns public image is being suppressed just as the e-fits were?
I will never understand how e-fits which could have been so crucial to the case were discarded as unimportant?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on April 27, 2015, 02:40:33 PM
Why has the Report never been made public I wonder?
I suppose because it is SY that got hold of it and they don't open up such things to public scrutiny. Prior to that it would have been in private hands who intended it to remain private and perhaps never see the light of day.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on April 27, 2015, 03:25:20 PM
There are problems with naming these two e-fits as 'Smithman' because it seems highly unlikely that the Smiths could have provided enough detail for e-fits, as two out of three said in May 2007 that they probably wouldn't be able to recognise him. In addition, they refused to produce e-fits when visited by Brian Kennedy, according to Martin Smith. He also refused to speak to the press and sent solicitor's letters to those who speculated about him. In May Mr Smith was concerned to stress that the man he saw wasn't Robert Murat. In September he was 60 - 80% sure that the man was Gerald McCann, based more on the way he held his head and carried his son than on how he looked facially. I have to wonder if he would have helped Oakley International to produce e-fits later in 2008, when they were also working for Brian Kennedy. If he did them with SY then it was a very long time after the event. DCI Redwood, of course, said the e-fits were produced by 'two witnesses'. He didn't say who the witnesses were.
Aoife Smith said on 26th May'
the individual was male, Caucasian, light-skinned, between 20/30 years of age, of normal physical build, around 1,70/1,75 metres in height. At the time she saw his face but now cannot remember it. She thinks that he had a clean-shaven face. She does not remember seeing tattoos, scars or earrings. She did not notice his ears. His hair was thick-ish, light brown in colour, short at the back (normal) and a bit longer on the top. — His trousers were smooth "rights" along the legs, beige in colour, cotton fabric, thicker than linen, possibly with buttons, and without any other decoration. — She did not see what he was wearing above his trousers as the child covered him almost completely at the top. — She did not see what shoes he was wearing.
Martin Smith said;
Regarding the description of the individual who carried the child he states that: he was Caucasian, around 175 to 180m in height. He appeared to be about 35/40 years old. He had an average build, a bit on the thin side. His hair was short, in a basic male cut, brown in colour. He cannot state if it was dark or lighter in tone. He did not wear glasses and had no beard or moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details partly due to the fact that the lighting was not very good. — He was wearing cream or beige-coloured cloth trousers in a classic cut. He did not see his shoes. He did not notice the body clothing and cannot describe the colour or fashion of the same.
Peter Smith said;
The description of the individual who carried the child was: Caucasian, around 175 to 180 cm tall. About 35 years, or older. He was somewhat tanned as a result of sun exposure. Average build, in good shape. Short hair, brown in colour. He does not remember if he wore glasses, or had a beard or a moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details as the lighting was bad. — He also does not remember the clothing the individual wore or his shoes. States that it would not be possible to recognize the individual in person or via photograph. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p6p1611
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Matthew Wyse on April 27, 2015, 03:27:42 PM
In an attempt to excuse the lapse it was suggested a while back that by providing the Smith e-fits to both LC and the PJ the parents had effectively done what was required of them. Sorry but that just doesnt cut it for me. If my kid had disappeared and there was the tiniest possibility that the person who took her had been seen and there were e-fits of him available I would be plastering Luz with them in order to get a result no matter what any police force advised.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Matthew Wyse on April 27, 2015, 03:33:22 PM
But then again if the e-fits looked like me I wouldnt be in a big rush to stick up posters everywhere. &%&£(+
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on April 27, 2015, 03:38:46 PM
Why has the Report never been made public? Is it a case, as I have suspected for some time, that there is a lot of cherry picking going on in this case and any information which could take the lustre off the McCanns public image is being suppressed just as the e-fits were?
I will never understand how e-fits which could have been so crucial to the case were discarded as unimportant?
Why should a private investigation's report be open to public scrutiny? If it were public, it wouldn't be private, would it?
There could be all kinds of information within it, some of which may be of use to law enforcement, some of which may have been discarded long ago.
The PJ appear to have found plugs for their leaky cauldron. I doubt that we'll hear anything new about the case until either there is a new appeal, Madeleine is found and/or someone is charged.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Matthew Wyse on April 27, 2015, 03:42:35 PM
Why should a private investigation's report be open to public scrutiny? If it were public, it wouldn't be private, would it?
There could be all kinds of information within it, some of which may be of use to law enforcement, some of which may have been discarded long ago.
The PJ appear to have found plugs for their leaky cauldron. I doubt that we'll hear anything new about the case until either there is a new appeal, Madeleine is found and/or someone is charged.
What happened to the promise of transparency given by the parents at the outset? Would see-through not be better?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on April 27, 2015, 03:54:33 PM
I wonder how Brian Kennedy and Metodo 3 knew that the Smiths even existed? Who told them that the Smiths had made statements to the PJ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on April 27, 2015, 04:00:14 PM
I wonder how Brian Kennedy and Metodo 3 knew that the Smiths even existed? Who told them that the Smiths had made statements to the PJ?
It was mentioned in Irish papers in 2007, and English ones the first week in January 2008.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 04:00:58 PM
I see that my thread title has been changed. The question I originally asked was - are the McCanns afraid of the Smithman e-fits (to the point where they will do anything not to draw attention to them). This is a "sceptic" belief, because some "sceptics" believe that the Met are playing mindgames with the McCanns and have decided to go after Gerry by dismissing Tannerman and focusing on Smithman, by highlighting a pair of e-fits that they (the Met) believe depict Gerry. The fact that the Official Find Madeleine page has not once but SEVEN times posted these e-fits, and then put a permanent "watch video" link to the Crimewatch programme at the top of their page suggests to me that the McCanns are quite comfortable with the way the Met's investigation is going. The only evidence that "sceptics" can scrape together to suggest the opposite is true is a) the fact that the e-fits don't appear on the official website, however this website seems not to be very active anymore and b) the fact that, despite being re-posted 7 times the e-fits are not used as the OFM FB page's cover photo. This is very weak evidence indeed to support the "sceptic" belief, in my view.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on April 27, 2015, 04:05:03 PM
Why should a private investigation's report be open to public scrutiny? If it were public, it wouldn't be private, would it?
There could be all kinds of information within it, some of which may be of use to law enforcement, some of which may have been discarded long ago.
The PJ appear to have found plugs for their leaky cauldron. I doubt that we'll hear anything new about the case until either there is a new appeal, Madeleine is found and/or someone is charged.
You've got a point there. I wouldn't trust those associated with Halligen to deliver a bottle of milk never mind a report- but if I interpret correctly it was intended for the people following them (Edgar & Cowley) not for the public?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 04:06:41 PM
Incidentally the Smithman e-fits were the OFM Facebook's cover photo for a whole month from October to November 2013. Now, that's not nearly long enough for people like Faithlilly, but if the McCanns really WERE terrified of these e-fits then they could simply have chosen to ignore them altogether, but the fact is - they haven't. They gave them extreme prominence at the time of the Crimewatch programme and for weeks afterwards. The fact that they are no longer pinned to the top of the FB page may be for a variety of reasons, not least that the Met may have decided to scale down their importance to the investigation. It's possible isn't it?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: John on April 27, 2015, 04:07:48 PM
There are problems with naming these two e-fits as 'Smithman' because it seems highly unlikely that the Smiths could have provided enough detail for e-fits, as two out of three said in May 2007 that they probably wouldn't be able to recognise him. In addition, they refused to produce e-fits when visited by Brian Kennedy, according to Martin Smith. He also refused to speak to the press and sent solicitor's letters to those who speculated about him. In May Mr Smith was concerned to stress that the man he saw wasn't Robert Murat. In September he was 60 - 80% sure that the man was Gerald McCann, based more on the way he held his head and carried his son than on how he looked facially. I have to wonder if he would have helped Oakley International to produce e-fits later in 2008, when they were also working for Brian Kennedy. If he did them with SY then it was a very long time after the event. DCI Redwood, of course, said the e-fits were produced by 'two witnesses'. He didn't say who the witnesses were.
Aoife Smith said on 26th May'
the individual was male, Caucasian, light-skinned, between 20/30 years of age, of normal physical build, around 1,70/1,75 metres in height. At the time she saw his face but now cannot remember it. She thinks that he had a clean-shaven face. She does not remember seeing tattoos, scars or earrings. She did not notice his ears. His hair was thick-ish, light brown in colour, short at the back (normal) and a bit longer on the top. — His trousers were smooth "rights" along the legs, beige in colour, cotton fabric, thicker than linen, possibly with buttons, and without any other decoration. — She did not see what he was wearing above his trousers as the child covered him almost completely at the top. — She did not see what shoes he was wearing.
Martin Smith said;
Regarding the description of the individual who carried the child he states that: he was Caucasian, around 175 to 180m in height. He appeared to be about 35/40 years old. He had an average build, a bit on the thin side. His hair was short, in a basic male cut, brown in colour. He cannot state if it was dark or lighter in tone. He did not wear glasses and had no beard or moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details partly due to the fact that the lighting was not very good. — He was wearing cream or beige-coloured cloth trousers in a classic cut. He did not see his shoes. He did not notice the body clothing and cannot describe the colour or fashion of the same.
Peter Smith said;
The description of the individual who carried the child was: Caucasian, around 175 to 180 cm tall. About 35 years, or older. He was somewhat tanned as a result of sun exposure. Average build, in good shape. Short hair, brown in colour. He does not remember if he wore glasses, or had a beard or a moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details as the lighting was bad. — He also does not remember the clothing the individual wore or his shoes. States that it would not be possible to recognize the individual in person or via photograph. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p6p1611
As far as I recall from the BBC Crimewatch, DCI Redwood attributed the two e-fits to the Smiths or more correctly to an Irish family who could only be the Smiths. As it would have been standard police practise to check this out before going public, we have no reason therefore to doubt the veracity of what he stated.
It could very well be that several e-fits were attempted between the older members of the nine who met the man that night. The two which have been revealed could very well be the best of the bundle and quite possibly not that accurate when all is taken into account. After all, aren't both e-fits supposed to be the same man, I emphasize the word 'supposed'!
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on April 27, 2015, 04:08:56 PM
Incidentally the Smithman e-fits were the OFM Facebook's cover photo for a whole month from October to November 2013. Now, that's not nearly long enough for people like Faithlilly, but if the McCanns really WERE terrified of these e-fits then they could simply have chosen to ignore them altogether, but the fact is - they haven't. They gave them extreme prominence at the time of the Crimewatch programme and for weeks afterwards. The fact that they are no longer pinned to the top of the FB page may be for a variety of reasons, not least that the Met may have decided to scale down their importance to the investigation. It's possible isn't it?
%£&)**# It is. But you can't blame people for wondering why they aren't on the website can you?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 04:13:20 PM
%£&)**# It is. But you can't blame people for wondering why they aren't on the website can you?
I do blame people for putting 2 and 2 together and arriving at 5, which so often happens in this case. You can see for yourself that the website is more or less dormant, and that virtually ALL OFM activity now takes place on their Facebook page. Why is that not a valid explanation for some people to grasp?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on April 27, 2015, 04:18:55 PM
As far as I recall from the BBC Crimewatch, DCI Redwood attributed the two e-fits to the Smiths or more correctly to an Irish family who could only be the Smiths. As it would have been standard police practise to check this out before going public, we have no reason therefore to doubt the veracity of what he stated.
It could very well be that several e-fits were attempted between the older members of the nine who met the man that night. The two which have been revealed could very well be the best of the bundle and quite possibly not that accurate when all is taken into account. After all, aren't both e-fits supposed to be the same man, I emphasize the word 'supposed'!
As I recall he said an Irish family saw a man with a child, but never specifically said they were the witnesses who produced the e-fits. Time for my nap now, but I'll revisit Crimewatch and check. 8((()*/
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on April 27, 2015, 04:19:56 PM
I do blame people for putting 2 and 2 together and arriving at 5, which so often happens in this case. You can see for yourself that the website is more or less dormant, and that virtually ALL OFM activity now takes place on their Facebook page. Why is that not a valid explanation for some people to grasp?
Maybe it's because they also see that the 10pm sighting was also ignored previously, publicly at last, right up to May 2009 in fact. That's why they're also wondering about what's happened after Crimewatch. You're only looking at October 2013 onwards.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Matthew Wyse on April 27, 2015, 04:21:59 PM
I see that my thread title has been changed. The question I originally asked was - are the McCanns afraid of the Smithman e-fits (to the point where they will do anything not to draw attention to them). This is a "sceptic" belief, because some "sceptics" believe that the Met are playing mindgames with the McCanns and have decided to go after Gerry by dismissing Tannerman and focusing on Smithman, by highlighting a pair of e-fits that they (the Met) believe depict Gerry. The fact that the Official Find Madeleine page has not once but SEVEN times posted these e-fits, and then put a permanent "watch video" link to the Crimewatch programme at the top of their page suggests to me that the McCanns are quite comfortable with the way the Met's investigation is going. The only evidence that "sceptics" can scrape together to suggest the opposite is true is a) the fact that the e-fits don't appear on the official website, however this website seems not to be very active anymore and b) the fact that, despite being re-posted 7 times the e-fits are not used as the OFM FB page's cover photo. This is very weak evidence indeed to support the "sceptic" belief, in my view.
But then you have to ask yourself who controls the FM website and who runs the Facebook page?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on April 27, 2015, 04:22:32 PM
What happened to the promise of transparency given by the parents at the outset? Would see-through not be better?
What? They've never denied that they'd hired PIs.
The purpose of hiring them was to gather potentially useful information for law enforcement to follow up, not armchair detectives with a misplaced sense of entitlement.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on April 27, 2015, 04:25:02 PM
I do blame people for putting 2 and 2 together and arriving at 5, which so often happens in this case. You can see for yourself that the website is more or less dormant, and that virtually ALL OFM activity now takes place on their Facebook page. Why is that not a valid explanation for some people to grasp?
Is there a link to their FB page on their almost moribund website telling people that this is where the action now is?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 04:27:29 PM
Maybe it's because they also see that the 10pm sighting was also ignored previously, publicly at last, right up to May 2009 in fact. That's why they're also wondering about what's happened after Crimewatch. You're only looking at October 2013 onwards.
The 10pm sighting was not ignored previously, please get your facts right.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 04:28:15 PM
The purpose of hiring them was to gather potentially useful information for law enforcement to follow up, not armchair detectives with a misplaced sense of entitlement.
I was talking about the promise to maintain transparency when they set up the Find Madeleine Fund. Withheld e-fits, secret reports, and hidden agendas are not exactly transparent ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on April 27, 2015, 04:31:41 PM
The 10pm sighting was not ignored previously, please get your facts right.
It was mate. The only book ever published on the case in UK indicated the 10pm sighting was likely to be more significant than 9.15's. That book was published in May 2008. However the other sighting was not acknowledged publicly by the McCanns or Mitchell at all between January 2008 and May 2009. It wasn't mentioned by the newspapers either.
Can you find any mentions? I don't think so. That's why people are still wondering.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 27, 2015, 04:36:55 PM
Is there a link to their FB page on their almost moribund website telling people that this is where the action now is?
It appears not but the website retains all the usual donation and shopping paraphernalia so it [the website] probably isn't thought of as being particularly redundant with respect to the campaign.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Matthew Wyse on April 27, 2015, 04:38:50 PM
Incidentally the Smithman e-fits were the OFM Facebook's cover photo for a whole month from October to November 2013. Now, that's not nearly long enough for people like Faithlilly, but if the McCanns really WERE terrified of these e-fits then they could simply have chosen to ignore them altogether, but the fact is - they haven't. They gave them extreme prominence at the time of the Crimewatch programme and for weeks afterwards. The fact that they are no longer pinned to the top of the FB page may be for a variety of reasons, not least that the Met may have decided to scale down their importance to the investigation. It's possible isn't it?
You're simply playing catch up Alfie. You know it and I know it, damn the whole forum knows it.
The McCanns failed to release to the public efits of a man seen with a child matching Madeleine's description on the night of the 3rd even though their own PIs thought they were a more important lead than Tanner's sighting, which was released.
Further after a brief month in a prominent position on the only campaign webpage that seems to be regularly updated the efits are now resigned to a video representation which can only be accessed through a non-description button linked to a webpage that everybody seems to have forgotten.
SY made it known two years ago that the efits are of very great importance to their investigation and nothing they have said since has changed that.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: John on April 27, 2015, 04:45:13 PM
It strikes me as somewhat remarkable that neither Leicestershire Constabulary nor the PJ came to the conclusion that promoting these e-fits would in any way advance the search for Madeleine yet some 5 years later SY look upon them as a unique development. So what changed?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 27, 2015, 04:49:43 PM
It strikes me as somewhat remarkable that neither Leicestershire Constabulary nor the PJ came to the conclusion that promoting these e-fits would in any way advance the search for Madeleine yet some 5 years later SY look upon them as a unique development. So what changed?
Tannerman got himself fragged?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 04:53:48 PM
You're simply playing catch up Alfie. You know it and I know it, damn the whole forum knows it.
The McCanns failed to release to the public efits of a man seen with a child matching Madeleine's description on the night of the 3rd even though their own PIs thought they were a more important lead than Tanner's sighting, which was released.
Further after a brief month in a prominent position on the only campaign webpage that seems to be regularly updated the efits are now resigned to a video representation which can only be accessed through a non-description button linked to a webpage that everybody seems to have forgotten.
SY made it known two years ago that the efits are of very great importance to their investigation and nothing they have said since has changed that.
Quite - the Met have said nothing about those e-fits for nearly two years, have done nothing themselves to re-publicise them, what might that suggest to you?
I don't understand your point re: the "watch video" on the OFM FB page - it links straight to the Crimewatch programme on the OFM's youtube channel and has been watched nearly 100,000 times.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 27, 2015, 05:01:24 PM
Quite - the Met have said nothing about those e-fits for nearly two years, have done nothing themselves to re-publicise them, what might that suggest to you?
I don't understand your point re: the "watch video" on the OFM FB page - it links straight to the Crimewatch programme on the OFM's youtube channel and has been watched nearly 100,000 times.
They now have the information they wanted. They have eliminated the guy from their enquiries. It was a bum steer. Whichever they ain't cracking on to it. So lets all keep on guessing shall we ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on April 27, 2015, 05:02:04 PM
Quite - the Met have said nothing about those e-fits for nearly two years, have done nothing themselves to re-publicise them, what might that suggest to you?
I don't understand your point re: the "watch video" on the OFM FB page - it links straight to the Crimewatch programme on the OFM's youtube channel and has been watched nearly 100,000 times.
Tell me Alfie what would you expect them to say ? If the person featured in the fits has been eliminated why are the efits still on either campaign website, albeit in a non-prominent position ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 05:07:55 PM
They now have the information they wanted. They have eliminated the guy from their enquiries. It was a bum steer. Whichever they ain't cracking on to it. So lets all keep on guessing shall we ?
All distinct possibilities - and all potentially very good reasons why neither the Met's Op Grange page nor the OFM FB page are refreshing the e-fit information on a regular basis. But no, let's just assume that it's because the McCanns are guilty and terrified instead, it's so much more fun that way!
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 05:10:09 PM
Tell me Alfie what would you expect them to say ? If the person featured in the fits has been eliminated why are the efits still on either campaign website, albeit in a non-prominent position ?
If the Met's £10m investigation totally hinged on those 2 e-fits and they were not getting any information about Smithman coming through then I would expect them to re-promote them, why wouldn't they?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 27, 2015, 05:33:27 PM
All distinct possibilities - and all potentially very good reasons why neither the Met's Op Grange page nor the OFM FB page are refreshing the e-fit information on a regular basis.But no, let's just assume that it's because the McCanns are guilty and terrified instead, it's so much more fun that way!
Red bit: a reason why the Met may not be refreshing their site but do you believe The Met would have told the McCanns "Smithman" had been deffed out (assuming he has been)? Blue bit: Nah! but I find it fun watching.
oops there wasn't a blue bit.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on April 27, 2015, 05:44:26 PM
Red bit: a reason why the Met may not be refreshing their site but do you believe The Met would have told the McCanns "Smithman" had been deffed out (assuming he has been)? Blue bit: Nah! but I find it fun watching.
oops there wasn't a blue bit.
The Met and the McCanns have both said that the latter are being kept in the loop by the former re developments, but no doubt you sneer at this.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on April 27, 2015, 05:53:28 PM
It strikes me as somewhat remarkable that neither Leicestershire Constabulary nor the PJ came to the conclusion that promoting these e-fits would in any way advance the search for Madeleine yet some 5 years later SY look upon them as a unique development. So what changed?
LP wasn't in charge of the investigation: the PJ was. The PJ apparently had them, but they weren't known for publicising e-fits. Once the case was archived, there WAS no active investigation.
What changed was that the Met dealt with it. That may include any underlying issues and were able follow up on leads.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Montclair on April 27, 2015, 05:56:40 PM
LP wasn't in charge of the investigation: the PJ was. The PJ apparently had them, but they weren't known for publicising e-fits. Once the case was archived, there WAS no active investigation.
What changed was that the Met dealt with it. That may include any underlying issues and were able follow up on leads.
There is no proof that the PJ had the e-fits.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly2.1 on April 27, 2015, 05:58:37 PM
Back to the question, are they less than happy with them?
Well, if they were happy - or further than that - ecstatic with them, what would we expect their approach to be? Certainly, they would have surely given them continued prominence on their site - as they would see them as a major breakthrough in the case - as AR seemed to put it on CW.
The truth is that they have been removed from the Official Madeleine site. Previously, a new click through page with various e-fits was there. Then it was removed and the Scotland Yard's thinking was cast doubt upon. There was a change - and that may suggest that they are indeed less than happy with them.
Taken from Find Madeline: "Based or {sic} more recent information, the Metropolitan Police now believe this man may represent a guest at the Ocean Club who was carrying his daughter back to their apartment. However as it is not possible to be certain that these two men are actually the same person, if you have seen this man in the pictures or suspect who it may be, please contact the Metropolitan Police's OPERATION GRANGE on 0207 321 9251 (0044 207 321 9251 from outside the UK) or Operation.Grange@met.pnn.police.uk and/or the Find Madeleine team on +44 845 838 4699 or investigation@findmadeleine.com."
Or it may suggest as some have noted that the e-fits have served their purpose and no longer need to be in the public realm. I very much doubt the family have been told this by SY -- simply because if that was the case, they wouldn't feature on the facebook site AT ALL.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on April 27, 2015, 06:02:11 PM
Kate and Gerry McCann and Madeleine's Fund The Sunday Times Published: 28 December 2013
In articles dated October 23 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."
Back to the question, are they less than happy with them?
Well, if they were happy - or further than that - ecstatic with them, what would we expect their approach to be? Certainly, they would have surely given them continued prominence on their site.
The truth is that they have been removed from the Official Madeleine site. Previously, a new click through page with various e-fits was there. Then it was removed and the Scotland Yard's thinking was cast doubt upon. There was a change - and that may suggest that they are indeed less than happy with them.
Taken from Find Madeline: "Based or {sic} more recent information, the Metropolitan Police now believe this man may represent a guest at the Ocean Club who was carrying his daughter back to their apartment. However as it is not possible to be certain that these two men are actually the same person, if you have seen this man in the pictures or suspect who it may be, please contact the Metropolitan Police's OPERATION GRANGE on 0207 321 9251 (0044 207 321 9251 from outside the UK) or Operation.Grange@met.pnn.police.uk and/or the Find Madeleine team on +44 845 838 4699 or investigation@findmadeleine.com."
Or it may suggest as some have noted that the e-fits have served their purpose and no longer need to be in the public realm. I very much doubt the family have been told this by SY -- simply because if that was the case, they wouldn't feature on the facebook site AT ALL.
If the McCanns are not happy with the e-fits why do they feature on their FB page AT ALL? Why do they keep a "watch video" button which takes the viewer straight to the Crimewatch programme that "sceptics" like to imagine the McCanns were so worried about, a programme that has been watched on the OFM's own youtube channel nearly 100,000 times?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 06:06:40 PM
PS: who would be "ecstatic" at the production of e-fits showing a mugshot of the man who may have abducted your daughter? Is it something that would make you happy and full of joy to look at?
Yes, it's a lead which is a positive thing but surely you'd have to be a bit warped to be in a state of ecstasy over it.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly2.1 on April 27, 2015, 06:12:36 PM
The McCanns turned up on Crimewatch. Remember this:
(https://infotomb.com/jo79x.png)
So you could make your argument that way Alfred. I don't accept the e-fits are prominent on their website, nor do I accept that they view them as central to solving this case. The sighting is on the site, but isn't prominent or immediately noticeable. Equally, the sighting is on the Find Madeline website as witness 5 of 5 as an audio recording.
(https://infotomb.com/xp91d.jpg)
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 06:17:57 PM
Perhaps you could address the point I made Gadfly?
If the McCanns are not happy with the e-fits why do they feature on their FB page AT ALL? Why do they keep a "watch video" button which takes the viewer straight to the Crimewatch programme that "sceptics" like to imagine the McCanns were so worried about, a programme that has been watched on the OFM's own youtube channel nearly 100,000 times?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly2.1 on April 27, 2015, 06:29:39 PM
I'm sticking to the subject topic Alfred.
I've listed a series of points: 1) Prioritisation of Tanner sighting above Crimewatch e-fits. 2) Prioritisation of Barcelona sighting above Crimewatch e-fits -- that concern a man in Luz. 3) Prioritisation of 4 other witness statements before the Smith account on OFM site. 4) Removal of CW e-fits from FM website.
All of this I would suggest means that the McCanns are happier promoting the Tanner account that SY showed had a different explanation during the CW show. In fact, as AR said, he was "almost certain" that SY had solved the Tanner sighting. Here he is appealing for the great British public to pay attention.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 06:32:27 PM
I've listed a series of points: 1) Prioritisation of Tanner sighting above Crimewatch e-fits. 2) Prioritisation of Barcelona sighting above Crimewatch e-fits -- that concern a man in Luz. 3) Prioritisation of 4 other witness statements before the Smith account on OFM site. 4) Removal of CW e-fits from FM website.
All of this I would suggest means that the McCanns are happier promoting the Tanner account that SY showed had a different explanation during the CW show. In fact, as AR said, he was "almost certain" that SY had solved the Tanner sighting. Here he is appealing for the great British public to pay attention: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDlTK3hg44Y .
[Youtube:LDlTK3hg44Y]
You are fixating on what is essentially a dormant website that hasn't been properly maintained in years. Why?
Incidentally, did you know that the ONLY e-fits that have ever been publicised on the OFM FB page (which has over 607k likes) are the Smithman e-fits? Why do you suppose that is the case?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on April 27, 2015, 06:34:09 PM
Perhaps you could address the point I made Gadfly?
If the McCanns are not happy with the e-fits why do they feature on their FB page AT ALL? Why do they keep a "watch video" button which takes the viewer straight to the Crimewatch programme that "sceptics" like to imagine the McCanns were so worried about, a programme that has been watched on the OFM's own youtube channel nearly 100,000 times?
How could they not have them SOMEWHERE on their campaign page ?
The only thing they feasibly could do is make the efits as hard to find as possible.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 06:37:06 PM
Using "sceptic" logic, the fact that the Tannerman likeness does not appear at all on the OFM FB page must mean that the McCanns are trying to suppress it in favour of the Smithman e-fits which do, correct?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly2.1 on April 27, 2015, 06:37:55 PM
You are fixating on what is essentially a dormant website that hasn't been properly maintained in years. Why?
Incidentally, did you know that the ONLY e-fits that have ever been publicised on the OFM FB page (which has over 607k likes) are the Smithman e-fits? Why do you suppose that is the case?
Alfred - you are spreading misinformation. The website is not dormant. It has had two significant updates in recent times. One to take down the Crimewatch e-fits. The other to question the conclusion regarding the Tanner sighting. To state otherwise is false.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 06:40:35 PM
How could they not have them SOMEWHERE on their campaign page ?
The only thing they feasibly could do is make the efits as hard to find as possible.
How do you account for the fact that the Crimewatch programme featuring the Smithman e-fits have been watched nearly 100,000 times on the McCanns' own youtube channel?
ETA: Compare that with less than 1000 viewings of the same programme on the highly esteemed (cough) HiDeHo's Youtube channel!
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 27, 2015, 06:41:59 PM
Kate and Gerry McCann and Madeleine's Fund The Sunday Times Published: 28 December 2013
In articles dated October 23 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."
October 2009? They were produced in 2008. The contract with Oakley International and Halligen was terminated by the end of September 2008, after £500,000-plus expenses had been spent.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on April 27, 2015, 06:47:49 PM
How do you account for the fact that the Crimewatch programme featuring the Smithman e-fits have been watched nearly 100,000 times on the McCanns' own youtube channel?
ETA: Compare that with less than 1000 viewings of the same programme on the highly esteemed (cough) HiDeHo's Youtube channel!
How many of those views have come through either of their campaign websites and how many recently at not at the time of the CW programme ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 06:52:43 PM
How many of those views have come through either of their campaign websites and how many recently at not at the time of the CW programme ?
Come again? What point are you trying to make? The Crimewatch programme appears on the OFM's OWN youtube channel. There is a link to it on their 600k+ followers FB page. What difference does it make when the views actually occurred, if they were last week or last year? The McCanns, if they were so anti the Crimewatch programme didn't have to put it on their youtube channel, nor did they have to link to it on their FB page. Please explain why they have managed to get so many views if they are embarrassed and ashamed of the programme and the e-fits?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly2.1 on April 27, 2015, 07:07:16 PM
Alfred - you still haven't withdrawn your comment about the OFM site being 'dormant.'
It isn't - it has had two significant changes to it in recent times, which is reasonable considering it isn't an interactive site reliant on new content, but rather an informational site with a stable fundraising section.
“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.” ― Abraham Lincoln
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on April 27, 2015, 07:10:59 PM
October 2009? They were produced in 2008. The contract with Oakley International and Halligen was terminated by the end of September 2008, after £500,000-plus expenses had been spent.
I was responding to Montclair who had said that there was no proof that they had been handed to the PJ.
The ST correction acknowledges that they WERE handed over (who by isn't entirely clear) in 2009 but neither police force (LP/PJ) did anything with them until the Met became actively involved.
As to a reason for any delay between when they were produced and when they were handed to the police in 2009... no idea.
There appears to have been quite a lot of legal wrangling between the Fund and Halligen/Oakley, and no doubt between Halligen and the seemingly unpaid subcontractors.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 27, 2015, 07:11:58 PM
The Met and the McCanns have both said that the latter are being kept in the loop by the former re developments, but no doubt you sneer at this.
Why would I sneer at it? I would take the pragmatic view that cops as always will tell folk only that which they want them to know and that which is expedient. That does not mean they are telling every last detail. RTFM and RTFSPS; sound advice.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on April 27, 2015, 07:13:25 PM
Others have had the same number of viewings, I think if someone's looking for the programme they type it in and click on the first one they see?
Crimewatch UK - October 2013 Madeleine Mccann Special by TG4L0 1 year ago107,276 views In a world exclusive, Scotland Yard detectives reveal their latest findings in the search for Madeleine McCann.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 07:47:24 PM
Others have had the same number of viewings, I think if someone's looking for the programme they type it in and click on the first one they see?
Crimewatch UK - October 2013 Madeleine Mccann Special by TG4L0 1 year ago107,276 views In a world exclusive, Scotland Yard detectives reveal their latest findings in the search for Madeleine McCann.
That is completely beside the point. The point is the OFM chose to put that video on its own youtube channel and it has been seen there 93,000 times. The point is - if the McCanns were actively against this programme and / or the e-fits they would hardly be wanting to promote it on their youtube channel and via their FB page.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 07:49:06 PM
Alfred - you still haven't withdrawn your comment about the OFM site being 'dormant.'
It isn't - it has had two significant changes to it in recent times, which is reasonable considering it isn't an interactive site reliant on new content, but rather an informational site with a stable fundraising section.
“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.” ― Abraham Lincoln
Define "recent times" - 2 changes in the last week or month and I'll retract my claim of "essentially dormant". 2 changes in the last six months or year and the comment stands.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly2.1 on April 27, 2015, 08:00:30 PM
Since 2011, there have been just over a dozen updates to this site. That's roughly the pace of around 3 a year.
In December 2013, 2 months after the CW special, the e-fits were removed from the site.
In January 2014, the commentary concerning Tannerman was updated to infer that SY may well be wrong.
There have been other updates (in the plural) since.
This was the old splash.
(https://infotomb.com/et6nx.jpg)
You're right Alfred in the sense that activity has shifted to facebook, but looking at it, much of that activity does not relate to the investigation. Such as:
(https://infotomb.com/lceqn.jpg)
Of course, that is a noble appeal - and of course, if the McCanns are behind that, well played to them. I have no doubt that the pain of losing their daughter drives them on to do good deeds.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 08:05:11 PM
Since 2011, there have been just over a dozen updates to this site. That's roughly the pace of around 3 a year.
In December 2013, 2 months after the CW special, the e-fits were removed from the site.
In January 2014, the commentary concerning Tannerman was updated to infer that SY may well be wrong.
There have been other updates (in the plural) since.
This was the old splash.
(https://infotomb.com/et6nx.jpg)
You're right Alfred in the sense that activity has shifted to facebook, but looking at it, much of that activity does not relate to the investigation. Such as:
(https://infotomb.com/lceqn.jpg)
Of course, that is a noble appeal - and of course, if the McCanns are behind that, well played to them.
An average of 3 updates a year clearly illustrates that the OFM site is essentially dormant as I stated. Compare this activity with the FB page which is very active by comparison, most of the activity centres around keeping Madeleine uppermost in people's thoughts.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 27, 2015, 08:07:28 PM
That is completely beside the point. The point is the OFM chose to put that video on its own youtube channel and it has been seen there 93,000 times. The point is - if the McCanns were actively against this programme and / or the e-fits they would hardly be wanting to promote it on their youtube channel and via their FB page.
Fact remains they made not a squeak about the efits for years before Crimewatch brought them to the public's attention...reason?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 08:08:25 PM
Fact remains they made not a squeak about the efits for years before Crimewatch brought them to the public's attention...reason?
No idea.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly2.1 on April 27, 2015, 08:11:56 PM
Dormant implies a significant slowing down. It hasn't.
But interestingly - the one time it wasn't dormant (under your definition) was when it came to the Crimewatch photos. Quickly on, quickly off.
And Alfred, you may wish to pass this advice on to the webmaster if you know him. This is the top ranking site for Madeleine:
(https://infotomb.com/6uk39.jpg)
Plus, as I demonstrated, the current Facebook site is starting to evolve into a missing persons site alongside the appeals for Madeleine. I completely understand why that is. The McCanns are trying to do good. The most important hub remains the OFM website.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 27, 2015, 08:13:28 PM
Makes one wonder though,especially in the light of them making a song and a dance about other efits/sightings/witness statements that have been at best questionable, rather than publicise something/someone seen at a relevant time, on the relevant day, not to worry though
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 27, 2015, 08:16:58 PM
An average of 3 updates a year clearly illustrates that the OFM site is essentially dormant as I stated. Compare this activity with the FB page which is very active by comparison, most of the activity centres around keeping Madeleine uppermost in people's thoughts.
but thats only relevant in any practical way if they are all "looking out" rather than praying and lighting candles on the internet
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 27, 2015, 08:20:33 PM
Dormant implies a significant slowing down. It hasn't.
But interestingly - the one time it wasn't dormant (under your definition) was when it came to the Crimewatch photos. Quickly on, quickly off.
And Alfred, you may wish to pass this advice on to the webmaster if you know him. This is the top ranking site for Madeleine:
(https://infotomb.com/6uk39.jpg)
Plus, as I demonstrated, the current Facebook site is starting to evolve into a missing persons site alongside the appeals for Madeleine. I completely understand why that is. The McCanns are trying to do good. The most important hub remains the OFM website.
Endless atonement...hmmm
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 08:25:05 PM
but thats only relevant in any practical way if they are all "looking out" rather than praying and lighting candles on the internet
Who's to say they aren't?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: lordpookles on April 27, 2015, 08:29:45 PM
I'm sure the findmadeleine site gets a lot of traffic. They would be neglecting a valuable resource if they were to allow it go completely dormant. Also, how many updates per year would we expect given that most has already been said and the only recent news other then libel trials is Crimewatch?
Regarding the 7 facebook posts of smithman efits. All were made over a few days around mid October 2013 and nothing since that I can see. To break it down smithman efits were posted 3 times on 19th Oct, 3 times on 15 Oct and 1 time on 12th Oct. Nada since then I can see... I see the watch video button....
I'm not pointing out these facts to create doubt - I'm pointing them out because they are facts. How anyone chooses to interpret that information is up to them. However, bear in mind that Smithman may well have been eliminated. Is there an SY/Operation Grange page anywhere where the Smith efits are also displayed as that may be somewhat interesting? I can't find them on the crimewatch website btw.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 08:31:05 PM
Makes one wonder though,especially in the light of them making a song and a dance about other efits/sightings/witness statements that have been at best questionable, rather than publicise something/someone seen at a relevant time, on the relevant day, not to worry though
I'm not worried. Perhaps it simply comes down to the fact that Mr Smith claimed the man he saw might be Gerry which rather called into question the reliability of his recall? I must admit it would make me question his judgment if I were in the McCanns' shoes, knowing that it wasn't Gerry he saw.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 08:33:12 PM
Dormant implies a significant slowing down. It hasn't.
But interestingly - the one time it wasn't dormant (under your definition) was when it came to the Crimewatch photos. Quickly on, quickly off.
And Alfred, you may wish to pass this advice on to the webmaster if you know him. This is the top ranking site for Madeleine:
(https://infotomb.com/6uk39.jpg)
Plus, as I demonstrated, the current Facebook site is starting to evolve into a missing persons site alongside the appeals for Madeleine. I completely understand why that is. The McCanns are trying to do good. The most important hub remains the OFM website.
I don't know the webmaster. Perhaps you could send him an e-mail yourself pointing out his or her failings?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly2.1 on April 27, 2015, 08:34:14 PM
I'm sure the findmadeleine site gets a lot of traffic. They would be neglecting a valuable resource if they were to allow it go completely dormant. Also, how many updates per year would we expect given that most has already been said?
Regarding the 7 facebook posts of smithman efits. All were made over a few days around mid October 2013 and nothing since that I can see. To break it down smithman efits were posted 3 times on 19th Oct, 3 times on 15 Oct and 1 time on 12th Oct. Nada since then I can see... I see the watch video button....
I'm not pointing these facts to create doubt - I'm pointing them because they are facts. How anyone chooses to interpret that information is up to them. However, bear in mind that Smithman may well have been eliminated. Is there an SY/Operation Grange page anywhere where the Smith efits are also displayed as that may be somewhat interesting? I can't find them on the crimewatch website btw.
That is a fair point. Smithman may well have been eliminated. In that case, it's interesting to see that the McCanns may well be out of the loop that I think Brietta was stating that they were in... Because if they were in the loop, then I'm sure that they would wish for the public's focus to be on identifying the unidentified... such as Barcelona woman... and as such, they would surely have taken down the Crimewatch images from the facebook site so that the public can see the wood through the trees. But since we don't know who operates that site, maybe the McCanns are too busy to deal with these details.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 27, 2015, 08:37:35 PM
I'm not worried. Perhaps it simply comes down to the fact that Mr Smith claimed the man he saw might be Gerry which rather called into question the reliability of his recall? I must admit it would make me question his judgment if I were in the McCanns' shoes, knowing that it wasn't Gerry he saw.
Well, quite, IF you were Gerry and IF you knew it wasn't you...only HE knows this, but you are digressing. The issue at hand was why hide / not publicise the efits in the first place...are you suggesting it might be "because" Gerry was potentially implicated by Smith originally? If it wasn't him it wasn't him. And why bypass the chance of soneone recognising the man in the efits...after all, no stone unturned, etc etc
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 08:46:04 PM
I'm sure the findmadeleine site gets a lot of traffic. They would be neglecting a valuable resource if they were to allow it go completely dormant. Also, how many updates per year would we expect given that most has already been said and the only recent news other then libel trials is Crimewatch?
Regarding the 7 facebook posts of smithman efits. All were made over a few days around mid October 2013 and nothing since that I can see. To break it down smithman efits were posted 3 times on 19th Oct, 3 times on 15 Oct and 1 time on 12th Oct. Nada since then I can see... I see the watch video button....
I'm not pointing out these facts to create doubt - I'm pointing them out because they are facts. How anyone chooses to interpret that information is up to them. However, bear in mind that Smithman may well have been eliminated. Is there an SY/Operation Grange page anywhere where the Smith efits are also displayed as that may be somewhat interesting? I can't find them on the crimewatch website btw.
More facts: The Smithman e-fits were the FB cover pic for a whole month between mid-October and mid-November. No one made the McCanns use the e-fits in this way. They chose to. They are the ONLY e-fits to have been featured on the FB page. The Smithman e-fits do not feature on either the Op Grange or the Crimewatch pages either as far as I can see.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 27, 2015, 08:46:50 PM
Maybe there is a general winding down of interest. Six months ago if one Googled McCann there would be something about Madeleine McCann on the first page. Now the first link is toward the bottom of the second page and that is only to the continuing DT story.
According to the stats I can lay my hands on 90% of UK households have internet access but there are only 24 million face book accounts in UK and I guess the bulk of those are teenagers with the potential of two or three accounts per household. I guess it makes sense to concentrate on the media with the lesser outreach though.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 08:53:21 PM
Maybe there is a general winding down of interest. Six months ago if one Googled McCann there would be something about Madeleine McCann on the first page. Now the first link is toward the bottom of the second page and that is only to the continuing DT story.
According to the stats I can lay my hands on 90% of UK households have internet access but there are only 24 million face book accounts in UK and I guess the bulk of those are teenagers with the potential of two or three accounts per household. I guess it makes sense to concentrate on the media with the lesser outreach though.
It shows how out of touch you are. Facebook is shunned by most teenagers now, it's the preferred social media site of old fogies these days.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 27, 2015, 09:07:35 PM
Maybe there is a general winding down of interest. Six months ago if one Googled McCann there would be something about Madeleine McCann on the first page. Now the first link is toward the bottom of the second page and that is only to the continuing DT story.
Of course interest is going to be dwindled amongst the general population,except for all us obstinates, obsessives, and "seekers of troof" as we are often slagged off for :)
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 09:12:53 PM
It would be improbable to say they are all out there actively looking for her but I see nothing improbable in the idea that if she and her age progression picture are kept fresh in their minds that this increases the likelihood that she may one day be spotted somewhere (if she is still alive that is).
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 27, 2015, 09:27:23 PM
i think posters need to see this thread, it seems it has all been said before
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on April 27, 2015, 11:09:49 PM
I imagine another point is that the website is more likely to be under the control of the McCanns. The Facebook page is perhaps run by supporters? I don't actually know, perhaps someone else does?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 27, 2015, 11:11:33 PM
I imagine another point is that the website is more likely to be under the control of the McCanns. The Facebook page is perhaps run by supporters? I don't actually know, perhaps someone else does?
Ask Faithlilly, she knows all about it.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 27, 2015, 11:18:23 PM
I imagine another point is that the website is more likely to be under the control of the McCanns. The Facebook page is perhaps run by supporters? I don't actually know, perhaps someone else does?
of course it is under the control of the Mccanns, they always "control" no one knows who actually runs it , the "webmaster" lol, the one who tells readers we dont care what you think about childcare.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on April 27, 2015, 11:27:30 PM
I know very little beyond that the webmistress defers to Miss Healey when asked a question and that she is very bad at propaganda.
Terrible propaganda, should be thoroughly ashamed of herself HVe to dash
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: slartibartfast on April 28, 2015, 06:28:01 AM
As an aside, the Facebook Group is not as controllable or focused as a website. Without regular updates posts fall off the front page on Facebook and especially with mobile access it is difficult to view old posts. With a website the owner can highlight what is important.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Montclair on April 28, 2015, 10:27:30 AM
Kate and Gerry McCann and Madeleine's Fund The Sunday Times Published: 28 December 2013
In articles dated October 23 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."
Who told the newspaper that the e-fits were provided to the Portuguese Leicestershire police? The McCanns of course and for me that is not proof. The PJ and the Leicestershire police have never confirmed the receipt of these e-fits.
BTW, even if the e-fits had been turned over to the police and the McCanns saw that nothing was being done by either force, why didn't they take the initiative to show them to the public. They had their spokesman hold press conferences before with dubious sightings, etc. and this should not have stopped them.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on April 28, 2015, 10:50:01 AM
Who told the newspaper that the e-fits were provided to the Portuguese Leicestershire police? The McCanns of course and for me that is not proof. The PJ and the Leicestershire police have never confirmed the receipt of these e-fits.
BTW, even if the e-fits had been turned over to the police and the McCanns saw that nothing was being done by either force, why didn't they take the initiative to show them to the public. They had their spokesman hold press conferences before with dubious sightings, etc. and this should not have stopped them.
Erm... I think you'll find that official apologies / corrections in newspapers of that nature tend to involve their legal desk. "Acknowledge and accept" is a clue that they were provided some kind of evidence or confirmation from an authoritative source that they were wrong. Otherwise they could just have said that "the McCanns deny the allegation".
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on April 28, 2015, 11:02:05 AM
Who told the newspaper that the e-fits were provided to the Portuguese Leicestershire police? The McCanns of course and for me that is not proof. The PJ and the Leicestershire police have never confirmed the receipt of these e-fits.
BTW, even if the e-fits had been turned over to the police and the McCanns saw that nothing was being done by either force, why didn't they take the initiative to show them to the public. They had their spokesman hold press conferences before with dubious sightings, etc. and this should not have stopped them.
As I said earlier, I can find a few plausible reasons:
a) they didn't hold the copyright / agreement to use them, if indeed they ever had them at the time (i.e., they could have been sent by Oakley to LP / PJ).
b) they could have had informal police advice not to release e-fits of a potential key suspect (i.e. one of a man actually carrying a child who may or may not have been Madeleine), without the backup of a live investigation to move quickly if needed.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on April 28, 2015, 11:18:33 AM
"Suppressed" is so much more emotive than "not released"...
I find the idea that they "suppressed" the e-fits because one looks vaguely like Gerry to be somewhat silly.
1. If they had had them and were free to use them, they could have chosen to release the other one, which looks nothing like him.
2. Kate devoted pages to a description / comparison of the similarities between Tanner/Smithman. If she'd been free to use them, she could easily have quipped that despite the fact that one vaguely resembles Gerry, it wasn't him.
3. I see no reason why the Met would not have taken notice of a caller saying it was Gerry if they were there that night and could corroborate it - as opposed to calls from the usual trolls wasting police time to point out the resemblance.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 28, 2015, 11:24:18 AM
When I started my business everyone told me I needed a website so I paid for my domain name and scouted about for someone to design and maintain my online presence. I also set up a Facebook page and twitter id. It soon became apparent to me that a website was going to be relatively expensive and time-consuming to keep updated regularly. In the meantime my facebook page is updated almost daily, and now has nearly 1500 followers, and my twitter account is fast catching up. Some of my fb and twitter posts reach far beyond my usual followers when they are shared or re-tweeted, something that is much less likely with a website. I have now completely abandoned my plans to launch a website as I can link my social media presence to a third party website where I can sell online too, reaching a far greater number of potential customers than I would with my website. Facebook may not be as big as "the tinternet" but when you combine it with twitter and youtube it is, almost!
Alf you really do disappoint me. Hitherto (I believe) you have refrained from "there I wuz" stories to support your argument. Now you have been and gorn and spoiled it.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: John on April 28, 2015, 11:32:52 AM
Who told the newspaper that the e-fits were provided to the Portuguese Leicestershire police? The McCanns of course and for me that is not proof. The PJ and the Leicestershire police have never confirmed the receipt of these e-fits.
BTW, even if the e-fits had been turned over to the police and the McCanns saw that nothing was being done by either force, why didn't they take the initiative to show them to the public. They had their spokesman hold press conferences before with dubious sightings, etc. and this should not have stopped them.
I think we all know the real answer to that Montclair. All and every e-fit should have been made available to the public regardless of how embarrassing they were. In fact, there is no excuse for engineering a policy of selective dissemination when it comes to a child's life.
Now thanks to what went on we are left with a maybe Tannerman and a possible Smithman, neither of whom have even now been positively identified.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on April 28, 2015, 11:36:40 AM
When I started my business everyone told me I needed a website so I paid for my domain name and scouted about for someone to design and maintain my online presence. I also set up a Facebook page and twitter id. It soon became apparent to me that a website was going to be relatively expensive and time-consuming to keep updated regularly. In the meantime my facebook page is updated almost daily, and now has nearly 1500 followers, and my twitter account is fast catching up. Some of my fb and twitter posts reach far beyond my usual followers when they are shared or re-tweeted, something that is much less likely with a website. I have now completely abandoned my plans to launch a website as I can link my social media presence to a third party website where I can sell online too, reaching a far greater number of potential customers than I would with my website. Facebook may not be as big as "the tinternet" but when you combine it with twitter and youtube it is, almost!
There are other videos on their FB page, mainly of the couple McCann whining outside the court in Lisbon, which play directly from the home page and not via a non-description button which is easily missed. Why wasn't if not all at least part of the CW video put on their page in the same way ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: John on April 28, 2015, 12:02:02 PM
The official FM website would for all intents and purposes appear to be at odds with SY's latest reveals in that Tannerman is still flavour of the month and Smithman has been effectively expunged. That would indeed engender the belief that they are not at all happy with the Smith e-fits.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on April 28, 2015, 12:13:33 PM
I think we all know the real answer to that Montclair. All and every e-fit should have been made available to the public regardless of how embarrassing they were. In fact, there is no excuse for engineering a policy of selective dissemination when it comes to a child's life.
Now thanks to what went on we are left with a maybe Tannerman and a possible Smithman, neither of whom have even now been positively identified.
You haven't been sucked in by sensationalism, by any chance, have you John? ;)
You said: "In fact, there is no excuse for engineering a policy of selective dissemination". That's a rather loaded statement, isn't it?
Do you KNOW why they weren't released earlier? I don't, so I'm not sure who "we all" refers to.
What evidence do you have that they were involved in "engineering a policy of selective dissemination" with regard to those e-fits? I'm all ears.
How does anyone know that Smithman hasn't been quietly identified? The police are not giving running updates.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on April 28, 2015, 12:29:07 PM
The official FM website would for all intents and purposes appear to be at odds with SY's latest reveals in that Tannerman is still flavour of the month and Smithman has been effectively expunged. That would indeed engender the belief that they are not at all happy with the Smith e-fits.
I can't imagine why. The PJ accepted that Gerald McCann was at the Tapas Restaurant when the Smiths saw the man with a child. His friends all testified to that.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: John on April 28, 2015, 12:41:19 PM
More facts: The Smithman e-fits were the FB cover pic for a whole month between mid-October and mid-November. No one made the McCanns use the e-fits in this way. They chose to. They are the ONLY e-fits to have been featured on the FB page. The Smithman e-fits do not feature on either the Op Grange or the Crimewatch pages either as far as I can see.
A quick look at the Metropolitan Police website and Operation Grange will reveal that all the previous information has been taken down. If one didn't know any better, one could be forgiven for thinking the case has been solved.
Poor Madeleine, I suppose it was only a matter of time.
You haven't been sucked in by sensationalism, by any chance, have you John? ;)
You said: "In fact, there is no excuse for engineering a policy of selective dissemination". That's a rather loaded statement, isn't it?
Do you KNOW why they weren't released earlier? I don't, so I'm not sure who "we all" refers to.
What evidence do you have that they were involved in "engineering a policy of selective dissemination" with regard to those e-fits? I'm all ears.
How does anyone know that Smithman hasn't been quietly identified? The police are not giving running updates.
The facts as previously reported speak for themselves.
It is more likely that the entire operation has been scaled down to reflect increasing public annoyance at the vast sums of money being spent on wild goose chases.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on April 28, 2015, 01:06:01 PM
A quick look at the Metropolitan Police website and Operation Grange will reveal that all the previous information has been taken down. If one didn't know any better, one could be forgiven for thinking the case has been solved.
Poor Madeleine, I suppose it was only a matter of time.
One could also be forgiven for thinking that the absence of the daily drip-feed of tabloid media sensationalism means that professional police work isn't making progress...
As one rather vocal ex-coordinator and subsequently ubiquitous media pundit concerning the case once said: "Justice works in silence". ;)
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 28, 2015, 01:07:40 PM
A quick look at the Metropolitan Police website and Operation Grange will reveal that all the previous information has been taken down. If one didn't know any better, one could be forgiven for thinking the case has been solved.
Poor Madeleine, I suppose it was only a matter of time.
The O.G. website cupboard is a bit Mother Hubbardsville isn't it? Website being updated? Case solved?, case about to be closed with no result? Fait vos jeux.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: DCI on April 28, 2015, 01:17:38 PM
A quick look at the Metropolitan Police website and Operation Grange will reveal that all the previous information has been taken down. If one didn't know any better, one could be forgiven for thinking the case has been solved.
Poor Madeleine, I suppose it was only a matter of time.
The facts as previously reported speak for themselves.
It is more likely that the entire operation has been scaled down to reflect increasing public annoyance at the vast sums of money being spent on wild goose chases.
I find it likely that there are fewer wild-goose chases now that the case is less of a tabloid keyword milk cow.
Some people may also be assuming that the money spent only concerns the search for Madeleine, without considering the potential side benefits of improving international police cooperation, gaining a better understanding of international legal issues, sharing best practice and cross-referencing potential connections with other cases.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: John on April 28, 2015, 01:24:41 PM
Thanks DCI but I already took note of the two remaining articles you linked to. All the e-fit information relating to persons of interest have been removed. My comment stands, one could be forgiven for thinking the case is dead as far as SY is concerned!
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 28, 2015, 01:49:18 PM
There are other videos on their FB page, mainly of the couple McCann whining outside the court in Lisbon, which play directly from the home page and not via a non-description button which is easily missed. Why wasn't if not all at least part of the CW video put on their page in the same way ?
You tell me Faithlilly - I'm sure you feel you know the answer so let's hear it.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on April 28, 2015, 01:53:34 PM
A quick look at the Metropolitan Police website and Operation Grange will reveal that all the previous information has been taken down. If one didn't know any better, one could be forgiven for thinking the case has been solved.
Poor Madeleine, I suppose it was only a matter of time.
So, the fact that Smithman doesn't appear on the Met or Operation Grange websites tells you what exactly? Is it possible that he is no longer considered a viable lead? Are there instances where police have issued an e-fit only to hold a press conference years later to say "we're no longer looking for this bloke"?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: John on April 28, 2015, 01:57:21 PM
So, the fact that Smithman doesn't appear on the Met or Operation Grange websites tells you what exactly? Is it possible that he is no longer considered a viable lead? Are there instances where police have issued an e-fit only to hold a press conference years later to say "we're no longer looking for this bloke"?
Not just Smithman but every other one as well. Looks like a case of, 'will the last man out please extinguish the light'. It is very revealing that the British press haven't received anything out of SY for weeks and then a story about rehashed resources. It is all beginning to make sense at last.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on April 28, 2015, 07:03:45 PM
I've always been a bit of an optimist and to me at the moment ~ no news is good news ~ I have confidence that as long as there is viable evidence to be followed it will be followed.
Mainly because at the end of the day someone is going to have to put their name to it whenever the end of the trail has been reached and no-one will be queuing up to be that person if there is any chance that in the future he/she will be revealed as having acted with undue haste.
Pretty much off topic but: My view is that O.G will be scaled down to one man and a dog. It is difficult to see how the present level of resources can be justified the budget will be the ruling factor in the final analysis. I wouldn't call cutting right back acting in haste after 4 years of O.G would you? I don't believe the case will be closed but that is a different matter. The case of Diane Jones (now that is an interesting case) is not closed but I doubt it has any officers working on it full time.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 29, 2015, 12:56:32 AM
Comes full circle, the mccanns had the efits, they didn't publish them, therefore suppressed ,hidden, didn't publish all mean the same thing ie they were not happy or interested to do so, is there any more to say? maybe they were happy to NOT publish them...was there anyone stopping them?
Goodnight Anna
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: sadie on April 29, 2015, 06:54:09 AM
Comes full circle, the mccanns had the efits, they didn't publish them, therefore suppressed ,hidden, didn't publish all mean the same thing ie they were not happy or interested to do so, is there any more to say? maybe they were happy to NOT publish them...was there anyone stopping them?
Goodnight Anna
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to remember that the PJ had the Efits too. And they didn't publish them either.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on April 29, 2015, 03:22:19 PM
Oh it didn't form part of the apology printed by the Times ? Silly me, thinking I had read it there.
The Sunday Times Published: 28 December 2013 In articles dated October 27 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/regulars/corrections/article1357081.ece
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on April 29, 2015, 05:18:54 PM
Oh it didn't form part of the apology printed by the Times ? Silly me, thinking I had read it there.
The Sunday Times Published: 28 December 2013 In articles dated October 27 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/regulars/corrections/article1357081.ece
If they were given to the police, it was a bit late and why? Neither of them were investigating the case at that time.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on April 29, 2015, 05:30:41 PM
If they were given to the police, it was a bit late and why? Neither of them were investigating the case at that time.
They WERE passed to the police, make no mistake about that.
I was under the impression Madeleine McCann's case was archived and would be reopened if and when compelling evidence became available ... the fact that sufficient evidence was upturned to enable the case to be dusted down and reopened suggests that the only people in Portugal with the power who could do so ... were indeed investigating.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: sadie on April 29, 2015, 05:56:14 PM
If they were given to the police, it was a bit late and why? Neither of them were investigating the case at that time.
Again correct me if I am wrong.
It is my understanding that those Efits were not produced at the time of the crime, but some years later.
If there were no eFits earlier: 1) Why didn't the PJ try and produce some themselves early on? 2) With no efits earlier, how could the Mccanns/ private investigators pass them on ? They didn't exist, it seems. You cant pass on something you aint got.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on April 29, 2015, 06:44:58 PM
It is my understanding that those Efits were not produced at the time of the crime, but some years later.
If there were no eFits earlier: 1) Why didn't the PJ try and produce some themselves early on? 2) With no efits earlier, how could the Mccanns/ private investigators pass them on ? They didn't exist, it seems. You cant pass on something you aint got.
Two out of three of the Smiths said they wouldn't recognise the man from a photo so why would the PJ try to produce e-fits? They refused to help produce e-fits when visited by Brian Kennedy. In September 2007 Mr Smith said Gerald McCann was the man he saw, based on the way he inclined his head and carried his son.
Henri Exton said the e-fits were produced by Oakley, who were sacked in 2008. They were given to police 'by' Oct 2009. Four years later they were used by Operation Grange on Crimewatch. No-one has actually said the Smiths helped produce them - DCI Redwood said 'two witnesses'.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on April 29, 2015, 06:56:58 PM
Two out of three of the Smiths said they wouldn't recognise the man from a photo so why would the PJ try to produce e-fits? They refused to help produce e-fits when visited by Brian Kennedy. In September 2007 Mr Smith said Gerald McCann was the man he saw, based on the way he inclined his head and carried his son.
Henri Exton said the e-fits were produced by Oakley, who were sacked in 2008. They were given to police 'by' Oct 2009. Four years later they were used by Operation Grange on Crimewatch. No-one has actually said the Smiths helped produce them - DCI Redwood said 'two witnesses'.
Indeed and Brian Kennedy's interference could have been seen as interfering with a witness! The efits do look like Gerry but they also resemble two other Portuguese nationals. Now for a couple who fought tooth and nail hmm to get people searching for their daughter so much so they sued a guy for 'damaging their reputation AND hampering the search for their daughter.. bit rich not to show the efits and claim they are 'helping' to find Maddie.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: sadie on April 29, 2015, 11:34:17 PM
Two out of three of the Smiths said they wouldn't recognise the man from a photo so why would the PJ try to produce e-fits? They refused to help produce e-fits when visited by Brian Kennedy. In September 2007 Mr Smith said Gerald McCann was the man he saw, based on the way he inclined his head and carried his son.
Henri Exton said the e-fits were produced by Oakley, who were sacked in 2008. They were given to police 'by' Oct 2009. Four years later they were used by Operation Grange on Crimewatch. No-one has actually said the Smiths helped produce them - DCI Redwood said 'two witnesses'.
There were not just 3, but several Smiths as you must know.
One of the three that gave a statement, did NOT say that she would not recognise Smithman from a photo. [I am guessing she, because Aoife was in a very well lit place when she saw him]
There were also another few Smiths there that saw him, most of them old enough to provide an image.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 29, 2015, 11:37:37 PM
There were not just 3, but several Smiths as you must know.
One of the three that gave a statement, did NOT say that she would not recognise Smithman from a photo. [I am guessing she, because Aoife was in a very well lit place when she saw him]
There were also another few Smiths there that saw him, most of them old enough to provide an image.
Maybe she would have in a line-up. It may have brought that memory back.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: sadie on May 01, 2015, 12:46:00 AM
Back to the question, are they less than happy with them?
Well, if they were happy - or further than that - ecstatic with them, what would we expect their approach to be? Certainly, they would have surely given them continued prominence on their site - as they would see them as a major breakthrough in the case - as AR seemed to put it on CW.
The truth is that they have been removed from the Official Madeleine site. Previously, a new click through page with various e-fits was there. Then it was removed and the Scotland Yard's thinking was cast doubt upon. There was a change - and that may suggest that they are indeed less than happy with them.
Taken from Find Madeline: "Based or {sic} more recent information, the Metropolitan Police now believe this man may represent a guest at the Ocean Club who was carrying his daughter back to their apartment. However as it is not possible to be certain that these two men are actually the same person, if you have seen this man in the pictures or suspect who it may be, please contact the Metropolitan Police's OPERATION GRANGE on 0207 321 9251 (0044 207 321 9251 from outside the UK) or Operation.Grange@met.pnn.police.uk and/or the Find Madeleine team on +44 845 838 4699 or investigation@findmadeleine.com."
Or it may suggest as some have noted that the e-fits have served their purpose and no longer need to be in the public realm. I very much doubt the family have been told this by SY -- simply because if that was the case, they wouldn't feature on the facebook site AT ALL.
This might feature in a bit of the thread that I have not yet read. Apologies is so.
There is no part of the Ocean Club that is on the Smithman sighting route. Zero, zip, nada. Because of the road-works, I can make a little sense out of someone taking his child out of the OC and heading to the west of Luz on this route.
But unless the OC took in children to the night crèche from people who were not in the OC, then Smithman was in the wrong place. There was no OC where he was. Smithman was outside the OC, by quite a way.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on May 01, 2015, 03:32:48 AM
Kate and Gerry McCann and Madeleine's Fund The Sunday Times Published: 28 December 2013
In articles dated October 23 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."
I am sitting with a copy of Kate's book "Madeleine", copyright 2011. The Smith sighting is described. There is an appendix, and in it one Irish witness definitely describes the Smithman sighting.
There are 5 e-fits in the book. Tannerman (no face), Berryman (who looks nothing like Neil Berry), pimpleman, followed by a blonde bloke I do not recognise, and a person I think is a bloke but it could be a female with short hair.
There is no e-fit of the Smithman sighting in the book.
So in 2011, Kate was publishing descriptions on Smithman, but not the e-fits that she had.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on May 01, 2015, 10:08:47 AM
I am sitting with a copy of Kate's book "Madeleine", copyright 2011. The Smith sighting is described. There is an appendix, and in it one Irish witness definitely describes the Smithman sighting.
There are 5 e-fits in the book. Tannerman (no face), Berryman (who looks nothing like Neil Berry), pimpleman, followed by a blonde bloke I do not recognise, and a person I think is a bloke but it could be a female with short hair.
There is no e-fit of the Smithman sighting in the book.
So in 2011, Kate was publishing descriptions on Smithman, but not the e-fits that she had.
What question do you think that raises?
That she knew the information provided for these efits had not been contributed to by the Smiths?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on May 01, 2015, 10:24:17 AM
That she knew the information provided for these efits had not been contributed to by the Smiths?
I can only find one example of the McCanns releasing an e-fit to the press, and that is the Gail Cooper one. Once again Brian Kennedy got involved;
She mentioned a man called Brian Kennedy who was working for the McCanns. H e had sent an artist down to do a sketch of the man she saw at the villa. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GAIL_COOPER.htm
According to Mr Smith he refused to help Kennedy and Metodo 3 produce an e-fit of his sighting. Henri Exton said the e-fits were produced by Oakley International along with a report, but he didn't actually say the Smiths helped in their production and neither did DCI Redwood.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on May 01, 2015, 10:47:47 AM
The question I keep coming back to is that if the McCanns had the same set of files as OG and OG found Tannerman's statement/questionnaire within those files why didn't the PIs years earlier ?
We are told that there was not enough money in the fund for the PIs to follow the two lines of investigation which the sightings demanded and so they concentrated on Tannerman but how thorough must the investigation have been if the people coming from the night crèche that night hadn't been looked at before OG ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on May 01, 2015, 10:53:37 AM
I can only find one example of the McCanns releasing an e-fit to the press, and that is the Gail Cooper one. Once again Brian Kennedy got involved;
She mentioned a man called Brian Kennedy who was working for the McCanns. H e had sent an artist down to do a sketch of the man she saw at the villa. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GAIL_COOPER.htm
According to Mr Smith he refused to help Kennedy and Metodo 3 produce an e-fit of his sighting. Henri Exton said the e-fits were produced by Oakley International along with a report, but he didn't actually say the Smiths helped in their production and neither did DCI Redwood.
I really do not think those efits are of smithman.
I have no explanation of why they weren't released unless at the time they had no credibility for some reason. Maybe SY tied in something missed by Leics and the PJ which raised their profile, or maybe fresh information came to light which added to their importance.
The thinner faced one has always seemed to me to have a resonance with the chap in sunglasses.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on May 01, 2015, 12:32:49 PM
The question I keep coming back to is that if the McCanns had the same set of files as OG and OG found Tannerman's statement/questionnaire within those files why didn't the PIs years earlier ?
We are told that there was not enough money in the fund for the PIs to follow the two lines of investigation which the sightings demanded and so they concentrated on Tannerman but how thorough must the investigation have been if the people coming from the night crèche that night hadn't been looked at before OG ?
It's very strange. I can't see anything to suggest that the night creche was looked at by the PJ at all. No booking in sheets like with the day creches are in the files. No evidence that booking in and out sheets were used. If they had been, why did Jacqueline and Charlotte not know who the mother was? There was never an appeal for those using the night creche to come forward, so did Operation Grange trace and interview all the guests who were there that week? We don't know.
That on 3rd May at about 22.05 she was working at the Mini Club, at the "dinner time period" together with colleagues Charlotte and Amy, when a female individual arrived, whose name she does not know, just that she was the mother of a child there (belonging to Toddlers 2), being a guest who was staying at the resort and who left at the end of the week, who told her that a girl called "Maddie" has disappeared, and that the girl's parents needed help in looking for her. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JACQUELINE_WILLIAMS.htm
On the 3rd of May 2007, around 22H15, the witness was working during "dinner hour", together with her colleagues Jackie and Amy, when an unknown woman came to them indicating that she was a tourist lodged at the complex and asked them if they had heard about a disappearance of a child, whose name she referred to as "Maggie" or "Maddy"; http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CHARLOTTE-PENNINGTON.htm
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on July 23, 2015, 11:41:38 PM
The Smithman efits have been added to that page within the past few days IMO, before that they were hidden away on another page and very hard to find, as was pointed out in this discussion http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6445.msg256125#msg256125
BTW here is a piece of completely out-of-date information still on that site today. "The full objects of the Fund are: ...(snip) ... To provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine's family.". If you don't believe me take a look (before it gets removed, several years late).
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on July 23, 2015, 11:44:21 PM
The Smithman efits have been added to that page within the past few days IMO, before that they were hidden away on another page and very hard to find, as was pointed out in this discussion http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6445.msg256125#msg256125
BTW here is a piece of completely out-of-date information still on that site today. "The full objects of the Fund are: ...(snip) ... To provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine's family.". If you don't believe me take a look (before it gets removed, several years late).
Well spotted Pegasus.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on July 24, 2015, 12:02:20 AM
The Smithman efits have been added to that page within the past few days IMO, before that they were hidden away on another page and very hard to find, as was pointed out in this discussion http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6445.msg256125#msg256125
BTW here is a piece of completely out-of-date information still on that site today. "The full objects of the Fund are: ...(snip) ... To provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine's family.". If you don't believe me take a look (before it gets removed, several years late).
So efit of SY identified man is not as important as spotty man etc
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on July 24, 2015, 12:05:06 AM
There appear to be several avid supporters of that fund here on this forum I imagine one of them will email the fund and get it fixed in the next few days. But back on topic, at least the smithman efits are now on their main unidentified persons page.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on July 24, 2015, 12:14:11 AM
Found it eventually, still not front page news there
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on July 24, 2015, 12:36:25 AM
Found it eventually, still not front page news there
IMO the smith sighting will probably turn out to be of an innocent dad and his daughter. The long sleeves are a bit of a clue. But SY need to discover who it is (just for elimination purpose IMO). So I'm surprised the fund directors did not push it to the front page of their site and add a description of the exact street junction he was seen and the fact he might have continued down those steps.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on July 24, 2015, 12:39:44 AM
IMO the smith sighting will probably turn out to be of an innocent dad and his daughter. The long sleeves are a bit of a clue. But SY need to discover who it is (just for elimination purpose IMO). So I'm surprised the fund directors did not push it to the front page of their site and add a description of the exact street junction he was seen and the fact he might have continued down those steps.
Lets face it the FUND/Mccanns /whoever buried the info in the first place,innocent dad or not, and even to today theyre not playing ball!!! And their supporters have the gall to ask why people get suspicious.
ps the sighting of a man ON THE NIGHT carrying a child looking like Madeleine was NEVER advertised by the Mccanns, they chose a pair of legs instead
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on July 24, 2015, 12:40:29 AM
IMO the smith sighting will probably turn out to be of an innocent dad and his daughter. The long sleeves are a bit of a clue. But SY need to discover who it is (just for elimination purpose IMO). So I'm surprised the fund directors did not push it to the front page of their site and add a description of the exact street junction he was seen and the fact he might have continued down those steps.
And when will he turn up? When the case is solved is your answer.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on July 24, 2015, 12:52:29 AM
And when will he turn up? When the case is solved is your answer.
Possibly when a Smithman appeal is made in Portuguese language in Portugal. Like the prominent Portuguese-language Smithman appeal page on the Madeleine Fund website. Oh sorry I forgot - there isn't one.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on July 24, 2015, 01:06:29 AM
Possibly when a Smithman appeal is made in Portuguese language in Portugal. Like the prominent Portuguese-language Smithman appeal page on the Madeleine Fund website. Oh sorry I forgot - there isn't one.
PMSL!!
@)(++(*
Youre funny Pegasus sometimes, keep at it!!
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on July 24, 2015, 01:25:46 AM
Portuguese version - but Smithman got lost in translation? http://findmadeleine.com/pt/campaigns/unidentified_people.html
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on July 30, 2015, 12:16:51 AM
The MF site very recently added the 2 Smithman efits on their english page http://findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html
But on their portuguese page the Smithman efits are completely missing http://findmadeleine.com/pt/campaigns/unidentified_people.html
Why are the Smithman efits missing from the portuguese language page? Isn't that the most important page? Are the fund directors not interested in finding portuguese-speaking witnesses?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on July 30, 2015, 01:07:36 AM
The MF site very recently added the 2 Smithman efits on their english page http://findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html
But on their portuguese page the Smithman efits are completely missing http://findmadeleine.com/pt/campaigns/unidentified_people.html
Why are the Smithman efits missing from the portuguese language page? Isn't that the most important page? Are the fund directors not interested in finding portuguese-speaking witnesses?
Don't look like it and I hope the yard have got all those photos that were uploaded to ceop website that Gerry kept promoting in his first interviews.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on August 02, 2015, 05:40:56 PM
Don't look like it and I hope the yard have got all those photos that were uploaded to ceop website that Gerry kept promoting in his first interviews.
Yes lets hope SY have obtained from CEOP all the tourists' uploaded photos. Just in case there might be photos in Tapas on evening 3rd. Or photos of the search that night. Then you could look for the beige/white trousers and black jacket what the man seen by smiths was wearing.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 02, 2015, 10:50:04 PM
Yes lets hope SY have obtained from CEOP all the tourists' uploaded photos. Just in case there might be photos in Tapas on evening 3rd. Or photos of the search that night. Then you could look for the beige/white trousers and black jacket what the man seen by smiths was wearing.
There will be new witnesses in those photos and the German reconstruction just had all the tapas men wearing beige trousers @)(++(*
"He does not remember what Kate was wearing that night. The arguido did not take a camera and does not remember if Kate did. (GM)
She returned to the restaurant to get her handbag as well as the camera of the couple McCANN and "baby monitor" of her daughter. (DW)
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on August 03, 2015, 01:53:22 AM
There will be new witnesses in those photos and the German reconstruction just had all the tapas men wearing beige trousers @)(++(*
"He does not remember what Kate was wearing that night. The arguido did not take a camera and does not remember if Kate did. (GM)
She returned to the restaurant to get her handbag as well as the camera of the couple McCANN and "baby monitor" of her daughter. (DW)
What on earth are you on about, Pathfinder ... neither Dr McCann or Diane Webster could possibly have fitted the Smithman description even if they had been wearing beige trousers, even if the trousers had ... buttons.
Anyway ... why do you suppose Smithman has anything at all to do the efits? How can they be one and the same?
In the three Smith statements given a fortnight after the event to which we have access all are in agreement that they did not see his face.
So whoever the efits represent ... it cannot be the man the Smiths said they saw ... for the simple reason none of them saw his face.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on August 03, 2015, 02:02:30 AM
What on earth are you on about, Pathfinder ... neither Dr McCann or Diane Webster could possibly have fitted the Smithman description even if they had been wearing beige trousers, even if the trousers had ... buttons.
Anyway ... why do you suppose Smithman has anything at all to do the efits? How can they be one and the same?
In the three Smith statements given a fortnight after the event to which we have access all are in agreement that they did not see his face.
So whoever the efits represent ... it cannot be the man the Smiths said they saw ... for the simple reason none of them saw his face.
Good point Brietta. IMO one of these two "smithman" efits was possibly done by a female british tourist who supposedly saw a man that night speaking in english on his mobile phone and carrying a child. Not in the files - it was a newspaper report.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on August 03, 2015, 11:35:09 AM
Good point Brietta. IMO one of these two "smithman" efits was possibly done by a female british tourist who supposedly saw a man that night speaking in english on his mobile phone and carrying a child. Not in the files - it was a newspaper report.
And why do you think it's not in the files Pegasus ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 03, 2015, 11:54:46 AM
What on earth are you on about, Pathfinder ... neither Dr McCann or Diane Webster could possibly have fitted the Smithman description even if they had been wearing beige trousers, even if the trousers had ... buttons.
Anyway ... why do you suppose Smithman has anything at all to do the efits? How can they be one and the same?
In the three Smith statements given a fortnight after the event to which we have access all are in agreement that they did not see his face.
So whoever the efits represent ... it cannot be the man the Smiths said they saw ... for the simple reason none of them saw his face.
GM & DW was about their camera being on the table on 3 May. Smithman will be revealed and young Aoife said she saw his face by the light but he moving quickly with the child trying not to be recognised (between a fast walk and a run).
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on August 03, 2015, 12:08:44 PM
What on earth are you on about, Pathfinder ... neither Dr McCann or Diane Webster could possibly have fitted the Smithman description even if they had been wearing beige trousers, even if the trousers had ... buttons.
Anyway ... why do you suppose Smithman has anything at all to do the efits? How can they be one and the same?
In the three Smith statements given a fortnight after the event to which we have access all are in agreement that they did not see his face.
So whoever the efits represent ... it cannot be the man the Smiths said they saw ... for the simple reason none of them saw his face.
Wasn't DCI Redwood's opinion slightly at variance with that statement?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on August 03, 2015, 01:00:05 PM
GM & DW was about their camera being on the table on 3 May. Smithman will be revealed and young Aoife said she saw his face by the light but he moving quickly with the child trying not to be recognised (between a fast walk and a run).
Young Aoife wasn't at all certain of which day it was they flew back from Portugal and stated that she wouldn't be able to 'recognise' either the man or the child so as far as substantiating your rather redundant theory goes ... Aoife Smith is a non-starter. The three Smiths were unable to describe the man's features to the PJ ... so why and when would they acquire the eye witness ability to describe what they did not see to enable efits to be produced?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on August 03, 2015, 01:56:08 PM
The three Smiths to whose statements we have access, were unable to provide adequate descriptions of the man they said they said they had seen when they reported their encounter a fortnight after the event.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 03, 2015, 02:21:49 PM
The three Smiths to whose statements we have access, were unable to provide adequate descriptions of the man they said they said they had seen when they reported their encounter a fortnight after the event.
SY have spoken to the Smith family since those statements. The efits were released by SY on the CW special and Tannerman dropped. Detectives can also be crafty by sending a clear message to him. They knew he wouldn't come forward and they have been proven to be correct.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on August 03, 2015, 03:56:37 PM
GM & DW was about their camera being on the table on 3 May. Smithman will be revealed and young Aoife said she saw his face by the light but he moving quickly with the child trying not to be recognised (between a fast walk and a run).
I would translate the Portuguese as saying that the individual's walk was normal, (Aoife) knowing how to distinguish this from a fast walk and a run.
Whether this is accurate or not, there is nothing about trying not to be recognised.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on August 03, 2015, 04:13:26 PM
And why do you think it's not in the files Pegasus ?
Re the female brit tourist who reportedly passed a man carrying a child and speaking native english on mobile phone. Probably it is a witness who came forward to the Crimewatch appeal. http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2014/06/phone-calls-frame-maddie-kidnappers.html
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on August 03, 2015, 04:48:00 PM
SY have spoken to the Smith family since those statements. The efits were released by SY on the CW special and Tannerman dropped. Detectives can also be crafty by sending a clear message to him. They knew he wouldn't come forward and they have been proven to be correct.
Yes, there is possibly a very good reason that he has failed to come forward ... then we do not really know if he has are or not since the investigation has remained shtum about all aspects of the case.
Everything about 'smithman' is very speculative indeed ... I would place little reliance on anything we think we know about him. Maybe we should start referring to him as the invisible man.
Any thoughts yet about how certain you are that the information for the efits was provided by the Smiths ... bearing in mind Aoife was able to describe the man she said she saw down to the buttons on his trousers ... but affirmed she could not recognise or describe his features.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on August 04, 2015, 01:37:38 AM
The three Smiths to whose statements we have access, were unable to provide adequate descriptions of the man they said they said they had seen when they reported their encounter a fortnight after the event.
So where did the efits come from? If not the Smiths? As reported in all the papers
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on August 04, 2015, 02:42:32 AM
So where did the efits come from? If not the Smiths? As reported in all the papers
IMO possibly one efit may be by a different member of smith party (for example maybe the child who was the only one to remember black jacket and barefeet). And possibly other efit by a brit tourist (not smith party) who a portuguese newspaper reports saw a talking-on-phone-while-carrying-child-man.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on August 04, 2015, 03:03:44 AM
IMO possibly one efit may be by a different member of smith party (for example maybe the child who was the only one to remember black jacket and barefeet). And possibly other efit by a brit tourist (not smith party) who a portuguese newspaper reports saw a talking-on-phone-while-carrying-child-man.
I thought you said this witness who saw the smithman talking on a mobile phone (which the smiths didnt) came forward after crimewatch, that was years after the efits were created
Oakley (who said the smiths created these efits) never mentioned this witness and why would witness come forward after crimewatch just to say i helped create efit???
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on August 04, 2015, 03:43:27 AM
O caminhar do individuo era normal, sabendo distinguir o mesmo entre o andar apressado e o correr. O mesmo nao aparentava cansaco, deslocando-se da forma normal quando se leva uma crianca ao colo. (AS)
The same (person) did not appear tired... {i.e. the child had not been a burden sufficient to tire the man}
... moving in a normal way when one carries a child ...
The only bit that may be problematical is ao colo - to the lap, to the neck.
However. the whole thing simply means the man was walking normally, did not appear tired, and was carrying the child in a normal manner.
If Aoife meant something else, she did not get it across in her statement.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: sadie on August 04, 2015, 10:14:32 AM
The same (person) did not appear tired... {i.e. the child had not been a burden sufficient to tire the man}
... moving in a normal way when one carries a child ...
The only bit that may be problematical is ao colo - to the lap, to the neck.
However. the whole thing simply means the man was walking normally, did not appear tired, and was carrying the child in a normal manner.
If Aoife meant something else, she did not get it across in her statement.
Any decent parent carrying their sleeping child down steps from an aircraft would carry in exactly the same way as Gerry .... and the parent would look down in the same manner to watch where his feet went on the steps.
I believe that Mr Smith rethought this scenario and decided to dismiss it?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 04, 2015, 11:24:10 AM
O caminhar do individuo era normal, sabendo distinguir o mesmo entre o andar apressado e o correr. O mesmo nao aparentava cansaco, deslocando-se da forma normal quando se leva uma crianca ao colo. (AS)
The same (person) did not appear tired... {i.e. the child had not been a burden sufficient to tire the man}
... moving in a normal way when one carries a child ...
The only bit that may be problematical is ao colo - to the lap, to the neck.
However. the whole thing simply means the man was walking normally, did not appear tired, and was carrying the child in a normal manner.
If Aoife meant something else, she did not get it across in her statement.
Why is 'between a hurried walk and run' in the translation? There is no need to have it there if it was normal walking at a normal speed.
They left the bar, and went up some steps that give access to a road just above. On this road they took a side street, the name of which he does not know, in the direction of Estrela da Luz. Immediately at the beginning of this road he saw an individual carrying a child, who walked normally, with a fairly quick step because he was coming downhill. It appeared normal to him, like father and daughter. (PS)
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on August 04, 2015, 01:11:12 PM
Why is 'between a hurried walk and run' in the translation? There is no need to have it there if it was normal walking at a normal speed.
They left the bar, and went up some steps that give access to a road just above. On this road they took a side street, the name of which he does not know, in the direction of Estrela da Luz. Immediately at the beginning of this road he saw an individual carrying a child, who walked normally, with a fairly quick step because he was coming downhill. It appeared normal to him, like father and daughter. (PS)
His gait and carrying a child appeared normal to Mr Smith who saw enough of the man to remove Robert Murat from the equation as he recognised clearly that it was not him. Neither did he get a clear enough sight of the face of the man he said he passed to be able to describe the features to the police to enable an efit to be constructed.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 04, 2015, 01:28:16 PM
His gait and carrying a child appeared normal to Mr Smith who saw enough of the man to remove Robert Murat from the equation as he recognised clearly that it was not him. Neither did he get a clear enough sight of the face of the man he said he passed to be able to describe the features to the police to enable an efit to be constructed.
Robert Murat was a suspect at the time of that statement so they would want to know if it him or not so they asked the question. There's nothing strange about it.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on August 04, 2015, 01:29:16 PM
Any decent parent carrying their sleeping child down steps from an aircraft would carry in exactly the same way as Gerry .... and the parent would look down in the same manner to watch where his feet went on the steps.
I believe that Mr Smith rethought this scenario and decided to dismiss it?
I'm not sure if that has been definitively established, but I do think it is a very safe assumption.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on August 04, 2015, 02:33:07 PM
Robert Murat was a suspect at the time of that statement so they would want to know if it him or not so they asked the question. There's nothing strange about it.
Didn't suggest for a minute there was anything at all strange that Mr Smith apparently had a clear enough view to recognise that it wasn't Robert Murat, who he knew by sight; and who was constituted arguido the day prior to the phone call from his son asking if they had dreamt their encounter.
With one person eliminated with such certainty, surely there must have been enough recall of features to make an attempt at efits a reasonable endeavour. Apparently there was not.
So that is three members of the Smith family ruled out for being responsible for the efits with which we are familiar.
In the course of the continuing official police inquiry into Madeleine McCann's disappearance ... does it not strike you as strange that if other members of the family had had a clear enough recollection of the man's features to enable sufficient information to provide efits ... that diligence would have taken place as part of the ongoing police investigation.
Which strongly indicates the efits were not constructed with the assistance of the Smith family.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on August 04, 2015, 02:43:09 PM
Didn't suggest for a minute there was anything at all strange that Mr Smith apparently had a clear enough view to recognise that it wasn't Robert Murat, who he knew by sight; and who was constituted arguido the day prior to the phone call from his son asking if they had dreamt their encounter.
With one person eliminated with such certainty, surely there must have been enough recall of features to make an attempt at efits a reasonable endeavour. Apparently there was not.
So that is three members of the Smith family ruled out for being responsible for the efits with which we are familiar.
In the course of the continuing official police inquiry into Madeleine McCann's disappearance ... does it not strike you as strange that if other members of the family had had a clear enough recollection of the man's features to enable sufficient information to provide efits ... that diligence would have taken place as part of the ongoing police investigation.
Which strongly indicates the efits were not constructed with the assistance of the Smith family.
No Murat is a lot heavier and bulkier than Smithman. You could tell straight away it wasn't him by his physique. I don't find it strange because Smithman connects to everything and he's not Robert Murat.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on August 04, 2015, 03:01:41 PM
Why is 'between a hurried walk and run' in the translation? There is no need to have it there if it was normal walking at a normal speed.
They left the bar, and went up some steps that give access to a road just above. On this road they took a side street, the name of which he does not know, in the direction of Estrela da Luz. Immediately at the beginning of this road he saw an individual carrying a child, who walked normally, with a fairly quick step because he was coming downhill. It appeared normal to him, like father and daughter. (PS)
O caminhar do individuo era normal, sabendo distinguir o mesmo entre o andar apressado e o correr.
O caminhar do individuo ere normal, The walk of the individual was normal,
sabendo distinguir o mesmo... knowing to distinguish the same...
entre o andar apresado e o correr... Now the most common translation of entre is 'between'. It is simply that here the best translation is 'from'. Aoife was not trying to make the man hurried. She was saying she could tell a person walking at unhurried pace from one walking quickly or running. ...from a hurried walk and from a run.
Read all of Aoife's statement and this fits. The man was 2m to her left, heading (down Rua 25 Abril) towards her. He was heading towards a street light. If his intention was to not be seen by Aoife and anyone in her group, he could have headed away from her (up Rua 25 da Abril).
The translators have gone through thousands of pages and done a decent job. They haven't done it with a fine tooth comb. The English version of Amaral's book, translated from Portuguese into French into English, makes the Smithman meeting happen a block away, though the original does not.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on August 04, 2015, 03:02:58 PM
No Murat is a lot heavier and bulkier than Smithman. You could tell straight away it wasn't him by his physique. I don't find it strange because Smithman connects to everything and he's not Robert Murat.
The efits show facial features. None of the Smith family were able to provide information about the facial features of the man they remembered a fortnight after the event; therefore it is highly unlikely the Smith family are the source of the efits which show faces in great detail.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2015, 08:35:20 PM
The efits show facial features. None of the Smith family were able to provide information about the facial features of the man they remembered a fortnight after the event; therefore it is highly unlikely the Smith family are the source of the efits which show faces in great detail.
According to an FOI to the Met. about the e-fits presented by DCI Redwood on Crimewatch in 2013 the Irish family mentioned in the programme created the e-fits. Both pictures are of the same man. They declined to answer other questions, specifically; on what date were the e-fits created, on what date were the e-fits shown to Operation Grange and on what dates did Operation Grange have contact the Irish family? https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/questions_about_two_e_fits_of_a?unfold=1
According to the McCanns the e-fits were given to LP and the Portuguese police in 2009. In 2011 they were given to Operation Grange along with a file. In 2013 DCI Redwood asked people to identify the man.
We have been treated to the sight of many e-fits since May 2007. What a shame that these most important ones, which DCI Redwood was so excited about, took four or five years to reach the public. How strange that, as Brietta mentions, none of the Smiths thought they would recognise the man they saw. Was the Irish family the Smith family or were there two Irish families who saw this man?
Also, to refer to the thread title, the McCanns made no effort to give the e-fits to the newspapers to publicise and they made no complaint when Operation Grange sat on them for over a year. The e-fits don't seem to have impressed the parents as important therefore.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Eleanor on September 08, 2015, 08:47:34 PM
Therefore what?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2015, 09:27:00 PM
They knew about them when they did their "Madeleine was Here" documentary/reconstruction in 2009. They could've shown all the efits in that documentary to try and help find her. They had been releasing posh spice and George Harrison but not Smithman carrying a lookalike and he's still not come forward. What do the McCanns think about that one? You are lucky to see them on their website @)(++(*
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2015, 09:35:54 PM
Yes, didn't know what?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Eleanor on September 08, 2015, 09:40:04 PM
Sorry. I think I lost the plot.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 08, 2015, 09:46:50 PM
Take more water with it Eleanor. 8)-)))
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Admin on September 08, 2015, 10:47:41 PM
I don't think there can be much doubt that the e-fits were compiled with the help of Martin Smith and his family.
DCI Redwood made such a big deal about the sighting by this Irish family on BBC Crimiewatch referring to it as an revelation moment if I recall correctly.
"A family from Ireland got such a good look at the man that they were able to produce two e-fit images."
This was also borne out by Kevin Halligen of Oakley International who stated that the e-Fits were compiled with the help of the Smith family.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on September 08, 2015, 10:51:53 PM
And yet they all claimed not to have got a good look at his face or to be able to recognise him again.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 08, 2015, 11:13:07 PM
Then could Redwood and SY be deemed remiss if they had reviewed the files and read where the Smiths said they wouldn't recognise him but plastered the efits on the TV anyway? Either they must have had faith in their returning memory later or thought what the heck anyway? or somethng else entirely... What else could it be? ?Any ideas?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on September 08, 2015, 11:24:35 PM
Then could Redwood and SY be deemed remiss if they had reviewed the files and read where the Smiths said they wouldn't recognise him but plastered the efits on the TV anyway? Either they must have had faith in their returning memory later or thought what the heck anyway? or somethng else entirely... What else could it be? ?Any ideas?
HE is the man to ask. He was the one who got the Smiths to do the efits.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 08, 2015, 11:31:19 PM
Henri Exton is the man to ask. He was the one who got the Smiths to do the efits.
Yes indeed, the gagged man!
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: lordpookles on September 08, 2015, 11:31:52 PM
So how were the efits done if they claim they would not be able to recognize the man? I assume they try to create an efit with the any features the witness can remember and fill in the gaps...
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 08, 2015, 11:59:50 PM
So how were the efits done if they claim they would not be able to recognize the man? I assume they try to create an efit with the any features the witness can remember and fill in the gaps...
If they said they couldn't recognise facial features at their first interviews how on earth would they be able to produce the likenesses we have seen many months after the event?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: lordpookles on September 09, 2015, 12:29:38 AM
True. Of course I hope they are a good likeness, but as you say probably can't expect too much... the police must put some value in them - every now and then if a likeness is vague they must be still effective enough to jog someone's memory. What is inexplicable to me is there was no crimewatch programme in Portugal where they may have been most effective.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 09, 2015, 12:34:26 AM
True. Of course I hope they are a good likeness, but as you say probably can't expect too much... the police must put some value in them - every now and then if a likeness is vague they must be still effective enough to job someone's memory. What is inexplicable to me is there was no crimewatch programme in Portugal where they may have been most effective.
PT wanted to air/repeat the programme, BBC told them they couldn't! how sad is THAT? I can dig out the details if you want, but the essence is the POrtuguese were refused
One source at hand, Portugal news, there are others
True. Of course I hope they are a good likeness, but as you say probably can't expect too much... the police must put some value in them - every now and then if a likeness is vague they must be still effective enough to jog someone's memory. What is inexplicable to me is there was no crimewatch programme in Portugal where they may have been most effective.
Perhaps it was a case of any names for Smithman being suggested to the Portuguese TV call-handlers may have found their way into the hands of the unscrupulous Portuguese press - thus destroying any chance of following the trail.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on September 09, 2015, 01:11:30 AM
This disappearance happened in a portuguese speaking country. So let's look at how the official TFM site backed by millions of pounds of donations focuses on smithman on its portuguese pages.
Main page - no smithman efits and no mention of him http://findmadeleine.com/pt/home.html
"Have you seen these people?" page - - no smithman efits and no mention of him http://findmadeleine.com/pt/campaigns/unidentified_people.html
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 09, 2015, 01:16:33 AM
This disappearance happened in a portuguese speaking country. So let's look at how the official TFM site backed by millions of pounds of donations focuses on smithman on its portuguese pages.
Main page - no smithman efits and no mention of him http://findmadeleine.com/pt/home.html
"Have you seen these people?" page - - no smithman efits and no mention of him http://findmadeleine.com/pt/campaigns/unidentified_people.html
No Smithman there because there was no Smithman there. My opinion only.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on September 09, 2015, 01:27:20 AM
But SY said their main attention has switched to smithman. You would expect the TFM portuguese pages to at least mention that wouldn't you?
Is there any mention whatsoever of smithman anywhere on the official TFM site in portuguese language?
SY's main attention may well have shifted to Smithman - but not necessarily for the purpose of putting a name to the face. You mean the OFM pages in Portuguese, don't you? TFM is not the official site.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on September 09, 2015, 02:03:22 AM
SY's main attention may well have shifted to Smithman - but not necessarily for the purpose of putting a name to the face. You mean the OFM pages in Portuguese, don't you? TFM is not the official site.
SY's smithman appeal was specifically to ask people to put a name to the face(s). I mean the the portuguese-language pages of the official website of MFLNSUL (links above).
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 09, 2015, 02:33:32 AM
SY's smithman appeal was specifically to ask people to put a name to the face(s). I mean the the portuguese-language pages of the official website of MFLNSUL (links above).
OK, sorry, but TFM is also Truth for Madeleine website here, which is for the "other side". SY appealed in the countries from where most of the Algarve tourists originated. The Smith family did not think the man was a tourist because of the way he dressed - so where was the logic in the SY appeal? Out of the roughly 4000 residents in PdL, how many do you suppose were little blonde girls between the ages of 2.5 & 5 years old?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on September 09, 2015, 02:55:10 AM
OK, sorry, but TFM is also Truth for Madeleine website here, which is for the "other side". SY appealed in the countries from where most of the Algarve tourists originated. The Smith family did not think the man was a tourist because of the way he dressed - so where was the logic in the SY appeal? Out of the roughly 4000 residents in PdL, how many do you suppose were little blonde girls between the ages of 2.5 & 5 years old?
Yes sorry I meant the official site of MFLNSUL.
What matters are the physical descriptions stated by the irish group. Their opinions on whether the man was a tourist or not are irrelevant because they are nothing but guesses.
A large percentage of the people in PDL that night were portuguese-speaking.
SY have never done a full smithman appeal in portuguese language IMO. Nor have Crimewatch (SIC and RTV tried but were refused). The website of the official fund has never even mentioned smithman in portuguese language IMO.
It's like if a Portuguese child disappeared in England, and all the appeals to identify efits of a suspect were made in portuguese and never in english, that's how ludicrously stupid it is IMO.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on September 09, 2015, 10:45:02 AM
OK, sorry, but TFM is also Truth for Madeleine website here, which is for the "other side". SY appealed in the countries from where most of the Algarve tourists originated. The Smith family did not think the man was a tourist because of the way he dressed - so where was the logic in the SY appeal? Out of the roughly 4000 residents in PdL, how many do you suppose were little blonde girls between the ages of 2.5 & 5 years old?
Didn't think he was tourist because he was warmly dressed? Isn't it amazing what a coat can do @)(++(*
You don't believe Smithman exists. Nuff said.
"It was exactly the same way and look of the male seen the night Maddie went missing . He also watched ITV news and Sky news and inferred it looked like the same person both times carrying the children.
Is asking a member of OP task ring him back. He was with group of 9 family and friends the night he saw the male in Portugal. He sounded quite worried and shaken whilst speaking to me."
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 09, 2015, 11:16:47 AM
This disappearance happened in a portuguese speaking country. So let's look at how the official TFM site backed by millions of pounds of donations focuses on smithman on its portuguese pages.
Main page - no smithman efits and no mention of him http://findmadeleine.com/pt/home.html
"Have you seen these people?" page - - no smithman efits and no mention of him http://findmadeleine.com/pt/campaigns/unidentified_people.html
Scotland Yard have no jurisdiction in Portugal.
At the time of Broadcast this was purely a British initiative: the Portuguese Public Ministry did not announce that the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance would be reopened until 24 October 2013. At which time if leaks to the Portuguese press are to be believed ... relations between the two policing bodies were somewhat delicate.
If the Polícia Judiciária set any store by the efits ~ presuming that apparently unlike the rest of the Portuguese population they know about them ~ surely they will be on the PJ website?
It is my opinion that the PJ and Scotland yard may now know much more about the person portrayed in these rather mysterious efits than they are letting on and that perhaps their purpose has already been fulfilled. They certainly don't give the appearance of being too agitated about it either in English or Portuguese.
"Job done" perhaps?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Alfred R Jones on September 09, 2015, 11:21:03 AM
At the time of Broadcast this was purely a British initiative: the Portuguese Public Ministry did not announce that the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance would be reopened until 24 October 2013. At which time if leaks to the Portuguese press are to be believed ... relations between the two policing bodies were somewhat delicate.
If the Polícia Judiciária set any store by the efits ~ presuming that apparently unlike the rest of the Portuguese population they know about them ~ surely they will be on the PJ website?
It is my opinion that the PJ and Scotland yard may now know much more about the person portrayed in these rather mysterious efits than they are letting on and that perhaps their purpose has already been fulfilled. They certainly don't give the appearance of being too agitated about it either in English or Portuguese.
"Job done" perhaps?
That's precisely what many "sceptics" believe too Brietta - they believe the e-fits were deliberately released by SY to spook "you-know-who" (first name rhymes with the last name of the woman baker in Great British Bake Off) - not sure if the tactic worked thought...? &%+((£
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 09, 2015, 11:25:52 AM
What matters are the physical descriptions stated by the irish group. Their opinions on whether the man was a tourist or not are irrelevant because they are nothing but guesses.
A large percentage of the people in PDL that night were portuguese-speaking.
SY have never done a full smithman appeal in portuguese language IMO. Nor have Crimewatch (SIC and RTV tried but were refused). The website of the official fund has never even mentioned smithman in portuguese language IMO.
It's like if a Portuguese child disappeared in England, and all the appeals to identify efits of a suspect were made in portuguese and never in english, that's how ludicrously stupid it is IMO.
When the Smith family made their original witness statements to the PJ weeks after Madeleine McCann's disappearance. They gave a description of the man they said they saw.
What level of importance did Mr Amaral and his team give to the report of the sighting?
What action did they take to publicise this individual to rule him in or out of the inquiry?
Surely if the man who did not have the appearance of being a tourist was a local father with a blonde daughter ... his elimination from the inquiry would have been a rubber stamp exercise when the PJ had sight of the little girl?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 09, 2015, 11:30:09 AM
That's precisely what many "sceptics" believe too Brietta - they believe the e-fits were deliberately released by SY to spook "you-know-who" (first name rhymes with the last name of the woman baker in Great British Bake Off) - not sure if the tactic worked thought...? &%+((£
LOL Alfred ... I know exactly who would have been identified by a Portuguese audience if they had been asked.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on September 09, 2015, 11:52:08 AM
When the Smith family made their original witness statements to the PJ weeks after Madeleine McCann's disappearance. They gave a description of the man they said they saw.
What level of importance did Mr Amaral and his team give to the report of the sighting?
What action did they take to publicise this individual to rule him in or out of the inquiry?
Surely if the man who did not have the appearance of being a tourist was a local father with a blonde daughter ... his elimination from the inquiry would have been a rubber stamp exercise when the PJ had sight of the little girl?
I like your line of thought.
Should you ever make it out to this neck of the woods, please let me know. I would be happy to show you around, and I would be happy to invite you to my dinner table.
Now let me throw out a thought, just a possibility.
Luz has lots of properties that are owned by Portuguese people who do not reside in Luz. People from Lisbon, Oporto, people from every other city in Portugal who have racked up a fair amount of wealth and who just like to go to the Algarve seaside.
Not picking on anyone, but there is a sense in which Luz is like an equivalent of Clacton-On-Sea.
If Smithman is Portuguese, how do we find him?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 09, 2015, 08:08:16 PM
When did the Portuguese police first make public the description of Tannerman? Was it before or after RM had been questioned as an arguido & presented with the evidence against him?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on September 09, 2015, 08:15:13 PM
When did the Portuguese police first make public the description of Tannerman? Was it before or after RM had been questioned as an arguido & presented with the evidence against him?
After
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 09, 2015, 08:28:24 PM
So the day after the PJ were "forced" to release the details of JT's sighting the Smiths arrive in Portugal to make their statements containing details of a man eerily similar to Tannerman.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on September 09, 2015, 08:33:51 PM
So the day after the PJ were "forced" to release the details of JT's sighting the Smiths arrive in Portugal to make their statements containing details of a man eerily similar to Tannerman.
I will check the dates...
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on September 09, 2015, 08:54:25 PM
So the day after the PJ were "forced" to release the details of JT's sighting the Smiths arrive in Portugal to make their statements containing details of a man eerily similar to Tannerman.
On 23rd May there were two phonecalls between a high member of Blair government and a tourist GM. On 24th May the British Ambassador popped down to the Algarve to continue the pressure. On 25th May the PJ did a brit-pressured u-turn and publically released details of the JT sighting. On 26th May three members of the irish group gave statements in Portugal. Here's a good article with some of the information. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/may/27/ukcrime.gordonbrown
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 09, 2015, 09:07:30 PM
On 23rd May there were two phonecalls between a high member of Blair government and a tourist GM. On 24th May the British Ambassador popped down to the Algarve to continue the pressure. On 25th May the PJ did a brit-pressured u-turn and publically released details of the JT sighting. On 26th May three members of the irish group gave statements in Portugal. Here's a good article with some of the information. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/may/27/ukcrime.gordonbrown
Thank you for that. The Smiths statements were timed at 1040hrs in Portimao so presumably they flew in on the 25th or before. Had the family been able to produce an efit at that stage, do you think the PJ would have been pressured into releasing that as well? There was more detail in the Smith statements than JT had provided.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on September 09, 2015, 09:27:19 PM
Thank you for that. The Smiths statements were timed at 1040hrs in Portimao so presumably they flew in on the 25th or before. Had the family been able to produce an efit at that stage, do you think the PJ would have been pressured into releasing that as well? There was more detail in the Smith statements than JT had provided.
I think the witnesses landed in Portugal that morning 26th Misty. After giving statements in Portimão, they went with PJ to the Rua Escola sighting location in PDL. There was absolutely no pressure from the Blair govt to publically release the Smith sighting. It first became publically known, by good-old-fashioned Irish local journalism, on June 6th. (Of course you could probably count the number of people in Berlin who'd be aware of that on one finger)
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 10, 2015, 12:05:38 AM
I think the witnesses landed in Portugal that morning 26th Misty. After giving statements in Portimão, they went with PJ to the Rua Escola sighting location in PDL. There was absolutely no pressure from the Blair govt to publically release the Smith sighting. It first became publically known, by good-old-fashioned Irish local journalism, on June 6th. (Of course you could probably count the number of people in Berlin who'd be aware of that on one finger)
Which begs the question that has been asked umpteen times but no one seems to be answering it...why did the Mccanns not publicise this sighting at all for so long with as much vigour as they did others when it was the closest possible thing to events on the night!
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 10, 2015, 12:27:07 AM
Which begs the question that has been asked umpteen times but no one seems to be answering it...why did the Mccanns not publicise this sighting at all for so long with as much vigour as they did others when it was the closest possible thing to events on the night!
The McCanns were never in a legal position to publicise the sighting. Only after OG was set up & the complete files made available for official perusal could SY determine if it was necessary to put the efits into the public domain.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 10, 2015, 12:33:15 AM
The McCanns were never in a legal position to publicise the sighting. Only after OG was set up & the complete files made available for official perusal could SY determine if it was necessary to put the efits into the public domain.
What do you mean by legal position? What stopped them legally publicising any sighting or efit ever? You've lost me.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 10, 2015, 01:11:17 AM
What do you mean by legal position? What stopped them legally publicising any sighting or efit ever? You've lost me.
The judicially secrecy laws/arguido status prevented them publicising the sightings & efits in the first instance. When the case was shelved. there was no official outlet to publicise the sighting/efits without invalidating any resultant information collected. The efits were obtained via private investigators- not admissible in a Portuguese court.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 10, 2015, 01:17:57 AM
The judicially secrecy laws/arguido status prevented them publicising the sightings & efits in the first instance. When the case was shelved. there was no official outlet to publicise the sighting/efits without invalidating any resultant information collected. The efits were obtained via private investigators- not admissible in a Portuguese court.
Who commissioned Melissa Littles drawings? published in October 2007 of Tannerman
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 10, 2015, 01:37:25 AM
Who commissioned Melissa Littles drawings? published in October 2007 of Tannerman
Those drawings form part of the official files therefore they were accepted as evidence by the PJ. The McCanns did not release them into the public domain.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 10, 2015, 01:47:28 AM
Those drawings form part of the official files therefore they were accepted as evidence by the PJ. The McCanns did not release them into the public domain.
So who did? And when?
And who told Jane Tanner whilst under the secrecy law she could spout to Panorama??
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 10, 2015, 01:51:41 AM
Gail Cooper spoke to the Daily Mirror. JT - I don't know. Perhaps you'd enlighten me. Who told RM he could speak to the Daily Mail?
Do you have no answers for anything much As for Gail cooper Omg
LOL!!!!! You HAVE to be joking, her story has been deconstructed as a total joke
now can we get back to why the Mccanns never made a peek about the Smiths sighting? because you have failed to explain why......
Who commissioned Little and who put out Tanner pic from that and when
And why did you connect that and try make excuses for Mccanns to NOT publicise the Smith sighting (most relevant if all) efit drawing or not when they have done it so many times after for the most ridiculous of reasons
Gnite misty just gave you my opinion
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Admin on September 10, 2015, 02:00:18 AM
And no bag was ever reported as stolen by the occupants of 5a.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Admin on September 10, 2015, 02:11:31 AM
Members are reminded that posts which contain content in breach of forum rules will be removed. Members who repeatedly break this rule are liable to be expelled from this forum.
Admin
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on September 10, 2015, 02:38:43 AM
The McCanns were never in a legal position to publicise the sighting. Only after OG was set up & the complete files made available for official perusal could SY determine if it was necessary to put the efits into the public domain.
There is absolutely nothing stopping the official fund website today from publicising the smith sighting on their portuguese language pages, but take a look at those pages, smithman does not exist there.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 10, 2015, 02:48:37 AM
There is absolutely nothing stopping the official fund website today from publicising the smith sighting on their portuguese language pages, but take a look at those pages, smithman does not exist there.
Obviously the portuguese language pages are the most important if they want to find potential new witnesses of Smithman.
people keep ignoring this question as they ignore others that jar their understanding oh well
fact remains Mccanns have NEVER publicised a very important sighting...of a four year old blonde girl on the night of the disappearance,at the relevant time, strange that is it not? When they have gone out of their way to publicise a bunch of other crap, never even bothered to stick the efits on their pages either, for ages, then never on their Portuguese ones, hmmmm they KNOW BETTER than SY after all,sleep well
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on September 10, 2015, 10:20:22 AM
Those drawings form part of the official files therefore they were accepted as evidence by the PJ. The McCanns did not release them into the public domain.
@)(++(* Misty, you should be on the stage with Frankie Boyle.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 10, 2015, 01:28:33 PM
The judicially secrecy laws/arguido status prevented them publicising the sightings & efits in the first instance. When the case was shelved. there was no official outlet to publicise the sighting/efits without invalidating any resultant information collected. The efits were obtained via private investigators- not admissible in a Portuguese court.
The arguido status of the McCanns ceased in July 2008. Can you think of any reason why, when the e-fits were given to the McCanns later in 2008 they didn't approach the media to publish them along with Oakley's hotline number? Do you think the media would have refused?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 10, 2015, 03:16:10 PM
The arguido status of the McCanns ceased in July 2008. Can you think of any reason why, when the e-fits were given to the McCanns later in 2008 they didn't approach the media to publish them along with Oakley's hotline number? Do you think the media would have refused?
Can you think of a reason why the PJ would accept or act upon any information forwarded by Oakley or the UK press which had been obtained following publication of the efits post July 2008?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 10, 2015, 03:22:18 PM
Can you think of a reason why the PJ would accept or act upon any information forwarded by Oakley or the UK press which had been obtained following publication of the efits post July 2008?
I didn't suggest that Oakley or the UK press should forward information to the PJ, so why ask that question?
If the e-fits had been publicised by the media and a contact number supplied, any information received could have been sent to the PJ by the McCanns. They had the right to bring new evidence forward.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 10, 2015, 08:30:42 PM
I didn't suggest that Oakley or the UK press should forward information to the PJ, so why ask that question?
If the e-fits had been publicised by the media and a contact number supplied, any information received could have been sent to the PJ by the McCanns. They had the right to bring new evidence forward.
Can you think of a reason why the PJ would act on information received via the McCanns from private detectives or the press following publication of efits which the witnesses on record were unable to produce for the original, since shelved, investigation?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 10, 2015, 10:24:10 PM
Can you think of a reason why the PJ would act on information received via the McCanns from private detectives or the press following publication of efits which the witnesses on record were unable to produce for the original, since shelved, investigation?
If the McCanns had presented new compelling evidence about their daughter's disappearance the PJ would have had to consider it.
The McCanns vowed to leave no stone unturned in their search or Madeleine, but they made no effort whatsoever to turn this stone over to see what was beneath it. If the e-fits had been publicised in 2008 instead of 2013 some interesting evidence might have been discovered. Five years lost!
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: carlymichelle on September 10, 2015, 10:25:18 PM
If the McCanns had presented new compelling evidence about their daughter's disappearance the PJ would have had to consider it.
The McCanns vowed to leave no stone unturned in their search or Madeleine, but they made no effort whatsoever to turn this stone over to see what was beneath it. If the e-fits had been publicised in 2008 instead of 2013 some interesting evidence might have been discovered. Five years lost!
you have to wonder why they waited all those years too dont you?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 10, 2015, 10:31:24 PM
The efits were produced after the end of January 2008 and were produced after commencement of the second enquiry during the crimewatch programme.
There was no other context (or earlier point) when they could have been unveiled publicly.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 10, 2015, 10:34:31 PM
you have to wonder why they waited all those years too dont you?
Was it said that they didn't have enough money? Of course the media wouldn't have charged them for printing the e-fits and Oakley's hotline was already up and running.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: carlymichelle on September 10, 2015, 10:35:41 PM
Was it said that they didn't have enough money? Of course the media wouldn't have charged them for printing the e-fits and Oakley's hotline was already up and running.
so no excuses really
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on September 10, 2015, 10:39:30 PM
If the McCanns had presented new compelling evidence about their daughter's disappearance the PJ would have had to consider it.
The McCanns vowed to leave no stone unturned in their search or Madeleine, but they made no effort whatsoever to turn this stone over to see what was beneath it. If the e-fits had been publicised in 2008 instead of 2013 some interesting evidence might have been discovered. Five years lost!
Five years were lost because crucial information, eg Tannerman, was sitting in the files of the shelved investigation. What external diligences did the PJ carry out in the vicinity of Kelly's Bar/Dolphin restaurant immediately after taking the Smiths' statements in May 2007? Answer - none. What use are a couple of efits from the hazy memories of people who had no true recollection of a person they claim to have encountered on the night of the 3rd?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 10, 2015, 11:12:17 PM
Weren't Oakley guilty of interfering with a witness during an ongoing investigation?
I think you may be ahead of me on this one. Please stick with me while I try to keep up.
Oakley produced the e-fits? Oakley, allegedly, interfered with a witness in an ongoing investigation? By 2011 Kate could not stick the e-fit in her book?
Please trust me. I am struggling to comprehend, so help would be most appreciated.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 11, 2015, 07:17:58 AM
The efits were produced after the end of January 2008 and were produced after commencement of the second enquiry during the crimewatch programme.
There was no other context (or earlier point) when they could have been unveiled publicly.
Why didn't they do it at a press conference like with the 'Victoria Beckham' e-fit in 2009? There was no investigation going on then.
AN Australian woman believed to hold vital clues to Madeleine McCann's abduction will today become the target of a worldwide hunt......Former police chief Dave Edgar, leading the McCanns' investigation team, will unveil an e-fit image of the woman at a press conference in London and appeal for anyone who knows her to come forward. http://www.mccannfiles.com/id262.html
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 11, 2015, 08:31:14 AM
How many efits were there in the book? Why was a book restricted to what was not happening in a not on-going enquiry?
A book is a book is a book.
The efits could have been released as soon as they were made.
No they couldn't.
All earlier efits were released in the context of a live and on-going police enquiry.
I am fairly certain it was only after the first enquiry was shelved and Mr Smith realised he had been (honestly) mistaken to suppose the Smiths had all seen Gerry that night that he agreed to produce the e-fit.
It turns out the second e-fit was produced by his wife.
There was no delay in forwarding the e-fits to the police, then it was up to the police to choose the timing of their (public) release, which they did.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on September 11, 2015, 08:48:15 AM
All earlier efits were released in the context of a live and on-going police enquiry.
I am fairly certain it was only after the first enquiry was shelved and Mr Smith realised he had been (honestly) mistaken to suppose the Smiths had all seen Gerry that night that he agreed to produce the e-fit.
It turns out the second e-fit was produced by his wife.
There was no delay in forwarding the e-fits to the police, then it was up to the police to choose the timing of their (public) release, which they did.
I've noticed that the UK will often release CCTV images or a description of someone they'd like to identify and interview quickly after a crime has been committed, but they often wait in cold cases for a signficant date (e.g., the anniversary of a disappearance), presumably to ensure maximum media attention and thus refocus public attention.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 11, 2015, 08:56:51 AM
Why didn't they do it at a press conference like with the 'Victoria Beckham' e-fit in 2009? There was no investigation going on then.
AN Australian woman believed to hold vital clues to Madeleine McCann's abduction will today become the target of a worldwide hunt......Former police chief Dave Edgar, leading the McCanns' investigation team, will unveil an e-fit image of the woman at a press conference in London and appeal for anyone who knows her to come forward. http://www.mccannfiles.com/id262.html
That sighting was in Barcelona, Spain, 3 days after Madeleine vanished.
The Smith sighting was of someone carrying a child in close proximity to apartment 5a at just about the time Madeleine was abducted.
Key difference ....
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 11, 2015, 09:03:43 AM
That sighting was in Barcelona, Spain, 3 days after Madeleine vanished.
The Smith sighting was of someone carrying a child in close proximity to apartment 5a at just about the time Madeleine was abducted.
Key difference ....
I don't understand what you mean, sorry. Both e-fits were the work of private investigators. One was released via a press conference, the other wasn't. Why are the sighting dates a 'key difference'?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 11, 2015, 09:11:37 AM
I don't understand what you mean, sorry. Both e-fits were the work of private investigators. One was released via a press conference, the other wasn't. Why are the sighting dates a 'key difference'?
Someone carrying a child in close proximity to apartment 5a (Praia da Luz) at just about the time Madeleine is known to have been abducted is (potentially) a suspect and that image can only be released into the public domain in the domain in the context of a live and on-going police enquiry.
That was the judgment of the police who had the e-fits in their possession well before the Crimewatch programme, and chose that programme as the right time for its public release.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 11, 2015, 09:37:40 AM
All earlier efits were released in the context of a live and on-going police enquiry.
I am fairly certain it was only after the first enquiry was shelved and Mr Smith realised he had been (honestly) mistaken to suppose the Smiths had all seen Gerry that night that he agreed to produce the e-fit.
It turns out the second e-fit was produced by his wife.
There was no delay in forwarding the e-fits to the police, then it was up to the police to choose the timing of their (public) release, which they did.
I think that assessment regarding the timing ties in with reports I have read; which in my opinion makes it all a little bit more extraordinary as far as the man the Smiths said they saw is concerned.
It would suggest they had a far clearer view of his face than they told the PJ they had had
It would also suggest that while Madeleine's case was being actively pursued they had no interest in cooperating in developing images which could have been useful in ruling a prime suspect in or out
That doesn't ring true for me ... I don't think the Smith family contributed to these efits ... I think it possible that another unidentified person/s who may have seen something similar and may have had a better memory for faces than they did is the source.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on September 11, 2015, 09:52:36 AM
I think that assessment regarding the timing ties in with reports I have read; which in my opinion makes it all a little bit more extraordinary as far as the man the Smiths said they saw is concerned.
It would suggest they had a far clearer view of his face than they told the PJ they had had
It would also suggest that while Madeleine's case was being actively pursued they had no interest in cooperating in developing images which could have been useful in ruling a prime suspect in or out
That doesn't ring true for me ... I don't think the Smith family contributed to these efits ... I think it possible that another unidentified person/s who may have seen something similar and may have had a better memory for faces than they did is the source.
On the second point, Martin was fuming at the press for misrepresenting what he'd said and quite possibly at some form of media intrusion going on at the time, and simply didn't want to cooperate with anyone other than the police. But the PJ seemingly never requested the Gardai to approach the family for an efit or artist's sketch...
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on September 11, 2015, 10:21:03 AM
I'm not sure I understand the importance of knowing who created these e-fits. Surely it is enough to know SY are using them in an effort to identify Smithman
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 11, 2015, 10:22:36 AM
I'm not sure I understand the importance of knowing who created these e-fits. Surely it is enough to know SY are using them in an effort to identify Smithman
That is the most important thing, I agree ...
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 11, 2015, 10:46:26 AM
I'm not sure I understand the importance of knowing who created these e-fits. Surely it is enough to know SY are using them in an effort to identify Smithman
Sit down and hold on tight, Jassi, I am in complete agreement with you on that one.
It is my opinion that the erroneous Sunday Times article was seized on with an unholy glee by those who have a dire antipathy towards Madeleine McCann's parents. The majority of thinking people reinforced by the award of damages paid for libel, have accepted it is nonsense, but there are those who cannot.
The sad thing is that this furore occurred right at the start of the reopening of the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance ... which was actually the most important issue at the time.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 11, 2015, 11:04:31 AM
Someone carrying a child in close proximity to apartment 5a (Praia da Luz) at just about the time Madeleine is known to have been abducted is (potentially) a suspect and that image can only be released into the public domain in the domain in the context of a live and on-going police enquiry.
That was the judgment of the police who had the e-fits in their possession well before the Crimewatch programme, and chose that programme as the right time for its public release.
What law or rule are you quoting which says that no-one except police carrying out a live investigation can release an e-fit of someone?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on September 11, 2015, 11:33:57 AM
Didn't Clarence & Edgar do a pseudo police-type press conference at which they promoted certain e-fits?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: stephen25000 on September 11, 2015, 11:36:08 AM
What law or rule are you quoting which says that no-one except police carrying out a live investigation can release an e-fit of someone?
Law or rule?
If you put into the public domain an image of someone carrying a child in close proximity to the scene of a crime, at roughly the time the crime is known to have happened, you are turning them into a potential suspect, which is OK in the context of a live and on ongoing police enquiry, but unacceptable (indeed libel!) apart from the context of a live and on-going police enquiry.
That is why Scotland Yard (who had the images in their possession for some considerable time before the crimewatch programme) chose the moment of broadcast of that programme to release the images into the public domain.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on September 11, 2015, 11:45:16 AM
I'm not sure I understand the importance of knowing who created these e-fits. Surely it is enough to know SY are using them in an effort to identify Smithman
That's the most important thing, I'd agree.
However, the discussion was about the allegations that the McCanns had had them for years but hadn't used them (with the insinuation that they chose not to because one of them looks a bit like Gerry).
I very much doubt that Kate wouldn't have released both e-fits in her book if there was not a legal or practical reason that prevented it (if ever she had access to them in the first place at the time).
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on September 11, 2015, 11:59:39 AM
However, the discussion was about the allegations that the McCanns had had them for years but hadn't used them (with the insinuation that they chose not to because one of them looks a bit like Gerry).
I very much doubt that Kate wouldn't have released both e-fits in her book if there was not a legal or practical reason that prevented it (if ever she had access to them in the first place at the time).
Yes, but I was responding (in part) to the suggestion that they may have been produced by people other than the Smiths.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on September 11, 2015, 12:11:46 PM
If you put into the public domain an image of someone carrying a child in close proximity to the scene of a crime, at roughly the time the crime is known to have happened, you are turning them into a potential suspect, which is OK in the context of a live and on ongoing police enquiry, but unacceptable (indeed libel!) apart from the context of a live and on-going police enquiry.
That is why Scotland Yard (who had the images in their possession for some considerable time before the crimewatch programme) chose the moment of broadcast of that programme to release the images into the public domain.
An interesting point and I've thought about it, but I'm not convinced that that's the reason.
There could have been practical issues surrounding publicising new e-fits without a live investigation to handle any new feedback from witnesses. On the other hand, there were several pages in Kate's book describing the similarities between the two sightings, so they were presumably hoping that it might trigger calls to the hotline.
I don't see how e-fits of an unidentified person, who could simply be an innocent dad to eliminate, could be libellous.
It's also possible that they were given advice not to publish them for reasons unknown... but then why insist on the similarities in the hope of feedback?
I'm still back to thinking that there were legal issues (surrounding ongoing litigation with Oakley & co.).
The Met would presumably have had powers to organise demanding the handover of any pending information under criminal laws that the McCanns may not have been able to achieve under civil laws.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on September 11, 2015, 12:15:20 PM
Yes, but I was responding (in part) to the suggestion that they may have been produced by people other than the Smiths.
Ahh. Ok.
Personally, I'd always assumed that they were done by the Smiths, but it's always possible that one or more people (not in the files) came forward at some point who'd got a better glimpse.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: lordpookles on September 11, 2015, 12:16:49 PM
If you published photos of the Victoria Beckham lookalike it's hard to see how legally you would be concerned about libel laws when publishing the smithman efits.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on September 11, 2015, 12:18:09 PM
An interesting point and I've thought about it, but I'm not convinced that that's the reason.
There could have been practical issues surrounding publicising new e-fits without a live investigation to handle any new feedback from witnesses. On the other hand, there were several pages in Kate's book describing the similarities between the two sightings, so they were presumably hoping that it might trigger calls to the hotline.
I don't see how e-fits of an unidentified person, who could simply be an innocent dad to eliminate, could be libellous.
It's also possible that they were given advice not to publish them for reasons unknown... but then why insist on the similarities in the hope of feedback?
I'm still back to thinking that there were legal issues (surrounding ongoing litigation with Oakley & co.).
The Met would presumably have had powers to organise demanding the handover of any pending information under criminal laws that the McCanns may not have been able to achieve under civil laws.
Was this stuff not already in the hands of the Leicester Police by this time? Surely UK police forces can freely share intelligence sources.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on September 11, 2015, 01:05:59 PM
Was this stuff not already in the hands of the Leicester Police by this time? Surely UK police forces can freely share intelligence sources.
From what I've read, the report and the e-fits somehow got transmitted to both LP and the PJ in 2011. It may therefore not have involved the Met in legal wrangling to get the report / e-fits out of Oakley itself.
However, did the McCanns have a copy at the time that they could legally have used?
Some people associated with Oakley were disgruntled that they hadn't been paid, although the Fund had paid Oakley or whichever official business entity, until the Fund got suspicious and cancelled the last leg of the renewable contract. Halligen should have paid the sub-contractors, but apparently didn't and was then arrested and convicted in the Trafigura saga.
I find it entirely possible that the Fund refused to pay a second time, but were trying to get hold of a copy that they could legally obtain / use. Possible issues are that they couldn't physically obtain or couldn't have used a copy from Oakley pending the outcome of whatever litigation, and / or that they had been given a copy under judicial secrecy by either LP / PJ.
However the Met got hold of it, it was then up to them to no doubt double-check, then choose an appropriate media-friendly moment to publicise them.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on September 11, 2015, 01:16:34 PM
I thought it was claimed that the McCanns gave the report to LP & PJ. If this is so, then they must have been legally free to do what they wanted with it.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 11, 2015, 01:28:56 PM
I thought it was claimed that the McCanns gave the report to LP & PJ. If this is so, then they must have been legally free to do what they wanted with it.
I thought they claimed they passed the e-fits to LP and the PJ in 2009. Why, I don't know because there was no investigation at the time. i can think of no reason why they couldn't have held a press conference and showed them, just as they did with the 'Victoria Beckham' e-fit.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on September 11, 2015, 01:33:31 PM
Ah right, it was just the e-fits, not the whole report. My mistake. But presumably they had the report from which to extract the e-fits.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 11, 2015, 01:41:12 PM
An interesting point and I've thought about it, but I'm not convinced that that's the reason.
There could have been practical issues surrounding publicising new e-fits without a live investigation to handle any new feedback from witnesses. On the other hand, there were several pages in Kate's book describing the similarities between the two sightings, so they were presumably hoping that it might trigger calls to the hotline.
I don't see how e-fits of an unidentified person, who could simply be an innocent dad to eliminate, could be libellous.
It's also possible that they were given advice not to publish them for reasons unknown... but then why insist on the similarities in the hope of feedback?
I'm still back to thinking that there were legal issues (surrounding ongoing litigation with Oakley & co.).
The Met would presumably have had powers to organise demanding the handover of any pending information under criminal laws that the McCanns may not have been able to achieve under civil laws.
The key difference between Kate's discussion of the sightings in her book and actual publication of the efits is that Kate's discussion in her book was never going to identify anyone specific.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on September 11, 2015, 02:21:13 PM
The key difference between Kate's discussion of the sightings in her book and actual publication of the efits is that Kate's discussion in her book was never going to identify anyone specific.
So what's the point? The point is to find Madeleine f*** the rest. Efits are of specific people. That's why they are done and released to find that person. Names will come in if you recognise an efit. That looks like so and so in PDL so I better call and tell them the name. Those names will then be investigated.
The key difference between Kate's discussion of the sightings in her book and actual publication of the efits is that Kate's discussion in her book was never going to identify anyone specific.
So explain again why you think identifying this person was not acceptable but identifying the 'Australian' woman was? Both were identified by witnesses. Both may have been innocent of any involvement with Madeleine's disappearance. Both needed to be eliminated. Neither e-fits were created as part of an ongoing police investigation.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 11, 2015, 02:25:23 PM
So explain again why you think identifying this person was not acceptable but identifying the 'Australian' woman was? Both were identified by witnesses. Both may have been innocent of any involvement with Madeleine's disappearance. Both needed to be eliminated. Neither e-fits were created as part of an ongoing police investigation.
Geography and time.
One was in close proximity to apartment 5a (Praia da Luz) at just about the time Madeleine was abducted.
The other other was another country and a different day.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on September 11, 2015, 02:37:24 PM
Can you think of a reason why the PJ would accept or act upon any information forwarded by Oakley or the UK press which had been obtained following publication of the efits post July 2008?
Isn't that why Oakley had the efits commissioned ? What other reason could there have been than to see if the public recognised the faces ? If Oakley wasn't collecting information to pass on to the PJ what exactly were they collecting information for ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 11, 2015, 02:48:07 PM
One was in close proximity to apartment 5a (Praia da Luz) at just about the time Madeleine was abducted.
The other other was another country and a different day.
Dave Edgar was quite clear when he said that a boat or car could have reached Spain in plenty of time to hand Madeleine over to that woman. What was he accusing her of then? Not of being an innocent bystander, I think. No difference as far as accusations go, both are very serious are they not?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on September 11, 2015, 02:49:14 PM
Isn't that why Oakley had the efits commissioned ? What other reason could there had been than to see if the public recognised the faces ? If Oakley wasn't collecting information to pass on to the PJ what exactly were they collecting information for ?
Give the Smiths credit for producing an efit which closely resembled the very person Oakley were working for. How to get a bunch of PI's off your back.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on September 11, 2015, 03:19:55 PM
One was in close proximity to apartment 5a (Praia da Luz) at just about the time Madeleine was abducted.
The other other was another country and a different day.
The fund was to find Madeleine. Releasing those efits at the time could have helped find her. What do you think the fund was for ? To keep searching forever so we will release some more efits every 5 years ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 11, 2015, 03:22:02 PM
The fund was to find Madeleine. Releasing those efits at the time could have helped find her. What do you think the fund was for ? To keep searching forever so we will release some more efits every 5 years ?
Scotland Yard (who had prior possession of the efits for a considerable time) chose the moment to unveil them publicly.
I am not going to try to second-guess Scotland Yard.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on September 11, 2015, 03:27:15 PM
Scotland Yard (who had prior possession of the efits for a considerable time) chose the moment to unveil them publicly.
I am not going to try to second-guess Scotland Yard.
SY weren't working on the case in 2008. The McCanns released their own documentary in 2009 entitled Madeleine was Here so they could have been included. World Exclusive: New suspect eye witness efits in our new documentary by our own investigation team!
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 11, 2015, 03:29:12 PM
SY weren't working on the case in 2008. The McCanns released their own documentary in 2009 entitled Madeleine was Here so they could have been included. World Exclusive: New suspect eye witness efits in our new documentary by our own investigation team!
Scotland Yard had the e-fits well before the Crimewatch programme and they chose the moment to release the efits publicly
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on September 11, 2015, 03:36:19 PM
SY weren't working on the case in 2008. The McCanns released their own documentary in 2009 entitled Madeleine was Here so they could have been included. World Exclusive: New suspect eye witness efits in our new documentary by our own investigation team!
You are puzzling me ... the Channel 4 documentary was a Cutting Edge production on Madeleine McCann's disappearance in which her parents were featured.
Can you give a cite for ... "The McCanns released their own documentary in 2009 entitled Madeleine was Here".
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 11, 2015, 03:41:06 PM
Did SY have them in 2008 when they were produced by the McCanns own investigation team?
If you read The Times apology of the article of their insight team, you will see that it is clearly stated that Scotland Yard had the efits in their possession for some considerable time before the Crimewatch programme, but (themselves!) chose the moment to release them publicly.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on September 11, 2015, 05:00:50 PM
If you read The Times apology of the article of their insight team, you will see that it is clearly stated that Scotland Yard had the efits in their possession for some considerable time before the Crimewatch programme, but (themselves!) chose the moment to release them publicly.
Before the Crimewatch programme but not for years after they were produced. Why did the McCanns, via Oakley, produce the efits if not to bring information into the investigation immediately ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Carana on September 11, 2015, 05:05:42 PM
Before the Crimewatch programme but not for years after they were produced. Why did the McCanns, via Oakley, produce the efits if not to bring information into the investigation immediately ?
That was presumably the intention, but no one - aside from the parties concerned - knows what hassles there may have been behind the scenes.
The most important point, as Jassi pointed out, is that the Met have now released them.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 11, 2015, 06:20:36 PM
Give the Smiths credit for producing an efit which closely resembled the very person Oakley were working for. How to get a bunch of PI's off your back.
It was a good way of Oakley getting itself sacked too.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on September 11, 2015, 07:23:10 PM
You are puzzling me ... the Channel 4 documentary was a Cutting Edge production on Madeleine McCann's disappearance in which her parents were featured.
Can you give a cite for ... "The McCanns released their own documentary in 2009 entitled Madeleine was Here".
It was a Emma Loach/Steve Anderson (Mentorn Media) production actually.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on September 11, 2015, 07:29:20 PM
That was presumably the intention, but no one - aside from the parties concerned - knows what hassles there may have been behind the scenes.
The most important point, as Jassi pointed out, is that the Met have now released them.
Strange if there were such hassles why no mention of them in Kate's book or after the Times article. An article detailing the thwarted efforts of the couple to have the efits released would certainly have negated much of the resulting criticism.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on September 11, 2015, 07:33:24 PM
It was a Emma Loach/Steve Anderson (Mentorn Media) production actually.
Thanks Lyall. They could have included the efits.
ID – In which documentaries did you participate?
Emma Loach corrects that she is actually the documentary maker. One was broadcast in May 2008, Madeleine McCann, one year on (ITV) and the other in May 2009, Madeleine was here (Ch4). In the first one she didn't use the word "abduction" and the McCanns, as arguidos, couldn't speak. The documentary is about the McCann European campaign.
Emma Loach, the daughter of the film-maker Ken Loach, has also become a close friend and adviser. She has made two television documentaries about the McCanns, and is a regular visitor to the McCanns’ home in Rothley in Leicestershire.
“We are hopeful that this book may help the investigation to find Madeleine,” says Gerry. “Our hope is that it may prompt those who have relevant information to come forward and share it with our team. “Somebody holds that key piece of the jigsaw.”
And It would help if you released all the pieces.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 11, 2015, 08:02:47 PM
It was a Emma Loach/Steve Anderson (Mentorn Media) production actually.
The McCanns had some control over it. The Portuguese TV station TV1 was going to buy it, then were told that the McCanns didn't want them to have it. It was given to another TV station, SIC, instead.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 11, 2015, 09:27:23 PM
One was in close proximity to apartment 5a (Praia da Luz) at just about the time Madeleine was abducted.
The other other was another country and a different day.
That was not the reason given (by a McCann fund source) according to the Times:- Quote He said the fund wanted to continue to pursue information about the man seen by Tanner, and it would have been too expensive to investigate both sightings in full — so the Smith E-Fits were not publicised. It was also considered necessary to threaten legal action against the authors. Unquote
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 11, 2015, 09:45:17 PM
Thank you Lyall. Then it is wrong to claim that "The McCann's released their own documentary."
That would be wrong but it wouldn't be wrong to say their friend/ally did.
Channel 4 were happy to give it airtime and that's their business, but it can't be argued it's anything other than a longer version of a party political broadcast. Like her film 12 months earlier it's a personal tribute.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 11, 2015, 11:15:18 PM
That would be wrong but it wouldn't be wrong to say their friend/ally did.
Channel 4 were happy to give it airtime and that's their business, but it can't be argued it's anything other than a longer version of a party political broadcast. Like her film 12 months earlier it's a personal tribute.
Plus the fact Gerry starred in it so much (not mentioning him and his PIs telling Jane she wrong) etc etc And theres the little matter of Loach herself taking it upon herself to state as a fact Tannmer saw Madeleine being abducted, big booboo.....doesn't she know anything about research? or does she just accept what her mates said so stick in it
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 11, 2015, 11:34:42 PM
Is it a criminal offence to supply false information to a Private Investigator?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on September 11, 2015, 11:41:47 PM
That would be wrong but it wouldn't be wrong to say their friend/ally did.
Channel 4 were happy to give it airtime and that's their business, but it can't be argued it's anything other than a longer version of a party political broadcast. Like her film 12 months earlier it's a personal tribute.
Just as Channel 4 were happy to up their ratings ... Madeleine McCann's parents were equally as happy to use the programme to up the profile of their continuing search for her.
To that end Dr Kate McCann uses the opportunity to publicise the sighting of the man the Smith family said they saw.
Voice over: The most likely sighting of Madeleine and her abductor was by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns.
In the files, Kate believes another witness statement from an Irish family, describes a very similar sighting to Jane’s. Less than a mile from the McCann’s apartment.
Kate: The reason why this is significant is.... both sightings were given independently.
So, when this family gave their statement they weren’t aware of Jane's description and there’s actually quite a lot of similarities ... and it does beg the question... I mean, how many people carry their children on a cold night, not covered, you know?
Nothing on their arms, or their feet - no blanket.
Now, either there’s been two people carrying children that way who haven’t come forward to eliminate themselves, or potentially they’re related.
Voice of Interviewer: But, you think that child is Madeleine?
Kate: I think there's a good chance it could be Madeleine.
Certainly the description there sounds to me like Madeleine. http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/41902208/Kate%20McCann%20and%20the%20Smith%20Sighting
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 12, 2015, 12:07:06 AM
Just as Channel 4 were happy to up their ratings ... Madeleine McCann's parents were equally as happy to use the programme to up the profile of their continuing search for her.
To that end Dr Kate McCann uses the opportunity to publicise the sighting of the man the Smith family said they saw.
Voice over: The most likely sighting of Madeleine and her abductor was by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns.
In the files, Kate believes another witness statement from an Irish family, describes a very similar sighting to Jane’s. Less than a mile from the McCann’s apartment.
Kate: The reason why this is significant is.... both sightings were given independently.
So, when this family gave their statement they weren’t aware of Jane's description and there’s actually quite a lot of similarities ... and it does beg the question... I mean, how many people carry their children on a cold night, not covered, you know?
Nothing on their arms, or their feet - no blanket.
Now, either there’s been two people carrying children that way who haven’t come forward to eliminate themselves, or potentially they’re related.
Voice of Interviewer: But, you think that child is Madeleine?
Kate: I think there's a good chance it could be Madeleine.
Certainly the description there sounds to me like Madeleine. http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/41902208/Kate%20McCann%20and%20the%20Smith%20Sighting
Whilst SITTING on the efits at the time and not putting them in, ok
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 12, 2015, 12:10:03 AM
Just as Channel 4 were happy to up their ratings ... Madeleine McCann's parents were equally as happy to use the programme to up the profile of their continuing search for her.
To that end Dr Kate McCann uses the opportunity to publicise the sighting of the man the Smith family said they saw.
Voice over: The most likely sighting of Madeleine and her abductor was by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns.
In the files, Kate believes another witness statement from an Irish family, describes a very similar sighting to Jane’s. Less than a mile from the McCann’s apartment.
Kate: The reason why this is significant is.... both sightings were given independently.
So, when this family gave their statement they weren’t aware of Jane's description and there’s actually quite a lot of similarities ... and it does beg the question... I mean, how many people carry their children on a cold night, not covered, you know?
Nothing on their arms, or their feet - no blanket.
Now, either there’s been two people carrying children that way who haven’t come forward to eliminate themselves, or potentially they’re related.
Voice of Interviewer: But, you think that child is Madeleine?
Kate: I think there's a good chance it could be Madeleine.
Certainly the description there sounds to me like Madeleine. http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/41902208/Kate%20McCann%20and%20the%20Smith%20Sighting
The description of Tannerman was made public by the PJ the day before the Smiths made their statements. No-one previously in the know could therefore have been accused of leaking information to the Smiths.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 12, 2015, 12:16:02 AM
The description of Tannerman was made public by the PJ the day before the Smiths made their statements. No-one previously in the know could therefore have been accused of leaking information to the Smiths.
Don't know about that, Misty.
Jane Tanner gave her description of the man she saw on the 4th ... so it was there on file in some form or other from that date.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 12, 2015, 12:19:55 AM
Whilst SITTING on the efits at the time and not putting them in, ok
You don't know that and can only speculate.
Rather extraordinary Dr McCann would publicise the Smith family carrier in Madeleine Was Here and in her book ... and at the same time try to hide his existence.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 12, 2015, 12:27:28 AM
Rather extraordinary Dr McCann would publicise the Smith family carrier in Madeleine Was Here and in her book ... and at the same time try to hide his existence.
yes extraordinary...are you saying Oakley/Exton gave them a report in November 2008 which included the efits which the Mccanns say they forward to the Leicester and Portuguese police a year later LOL and never saw the efits in it? But which their fund spokesman said they decided not to release cos they could only give so much money to concentrate on one sighting? IE the Tanner one?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on September 12, 2015, 12:32:30 AM
I'm almost feeling sorry for you, Brietta. Defending the impossible-to-defend isn't easy.
You should just agree you don't know why they behaved as they did.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 12, 2015, 12:48:48 AM
I'm almost feeling sorry for you, Brietta. Defending the impossible-to-defend isn't easy.
You should just agree you don't know why they behaved as they did.
I'm defending nothing for the simple reason I don't have to ... simple logic tells me that the Sunday Times did not hand over fifty five grand and apologise because their report was spot on ... it was obviously very seriously flawed. Which, if you are using it as the basis of your criticism makes your criticism just as seriously flawed.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Lyall on September 12, 2015, 12:57:41 AM
I'm defending nothing for the simple reason I don't have to ... simple logic tells me that the Sunday Times did not hand over fifty five grand and apologise because their report was spot on ... it was obviously very seriously flawed. Which, if you are using it as the basis of your criticism makes your criticism just as seriously flawed.
We know what was wrong with the facts in that article because the correction told us. It wasn't very seriously flawed at all. In fact just one aspect was changed.
At least that's as far as we know. If more was wrong with it we haven't been told, so you have nothing to support your claim it was "very seriously flawed". You're simply guessing, and isn't that what you're always telling us not to do?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on September 12, 2015, 12:59:09 AM
I'm defending nothing for the simple reason I don't have to ... simple logic tells me that the Sunday Times did not hand over fifty five grand and apologise because their report was spot on ... it was obviously very seriously flawed. Which, if you are using it as the basis of your criticism makes your criticism just as seriously flawed.
it was only slightly wrong in the dates the MCCANNS GAVE THE EFITS to police all else is kosha as has been explained before....you should actually be thinking about why the Mccanns thought they had any jurisdiction over evidence...!!!! And chose to do what they wanted with its.. It's a seriously wtf moment but I'm sure you will explain it all away... any police person/ lawyer worth their salt might call it perverting the course of justice /withholding information??? give your grey cells an exercise Brietta ...THE MINUTE the Mccanns got their report and efits they should have forwarded them to police not wait for a year, what ARE YOU ON??? You'd think the Mccanns were trying to control the investigation...surely not
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 12, 2015, 06:15:09 AM
Just as Channel 4 were happy to up their ratings ... Madeleine McCann's parents were equally as happy to use the programme to up the profile of their continuing search for her.
To that end Dr Kate McCann uses the opportunity to publicise the sighting of the man the Smith family said they saw.
Voice over: The most likely sighting of Madeleine and her abductor was by Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns.
In the files, Kate believes another witness statement from an Irish family, describes a very similar sighting to Jane’s. Less than a mile from the McCann’s apartment.
Kate: The reason why this is significant is.... both sightings were given independently.
So, when this family gave their statement they weren’t aware of Jane's description and there’s actually quite a lot of similarities ... and it does beg the question... I mean, how many people carry their children on a cold night, not covered, you know?
Nothing on their arms, or their feet - no blanket.
Now, either there’s been two people carrying children that way who haven’t come forward to eliminate themselves, or potentially they’re related.
Voice of Interviewer: But, you think that child is Madeleine?
Kate: I think there's a good chance it could be Madeleine.
Certainly the description there sounds to me like Madeleine. http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/41902208/Kate%20McCann%20and%20the%20Smith%20Sighting
The Smith's sighting was in the PJ Files. The McCanns seem to have decided to link the two sightings together in the documentary and the book. The suggestion being that they were the same man. Had they shown the e-fits which (allegedly) they had in their possession at the time it would have been clear that it wasn't the same man. Unless it took him 45 minutes to reach the Smiths because he stopped for a late-night haircut.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 12, 2015, 08:26:40 AM
We know what was wrong with the facts in that article because the correction told us. It wasn't very seriously flawed at all. In fact just one aspect was changed.
At least that's as far as we know. If more was wrong with it we haven't been told, so you have nothing to support your claim it was "very seriously flawed". You're simply guessing, and isn't that what you're always telling us not to do?
When was the e-fit produced? By the end of January 2008, it hadn't been, because in his statement to the Irish Gardia police at that date, Mr Smith says he had been approached by Brian Kennedy to produce an e-fit, but had refused.
It was surely produced after the case was archived after early August 2008, when the files were released and Mr Smith realised he had been (honestly) mistaken to suppose the person the Smiths all saw was Gerry.
Very shortly thereafter, the e-fits were with British police who, themselves, chose the moment of their public release.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: stephen25000 on September 12, 2015, 08:32:52 AM
When was the e-fit produced? By the end of January 2008, it hadn't been, because in his statement to the Irish Gardia police at that date, Mr Smith says he had been approached by Brian Kennedy to produce an e-fit, but had refused.
It was surely produced after the case was archived after early August 2008, when the files were released and Mr Smith realised he had been (honestly) mistaken to suppose the person the Smiths all saw was Gerry.
Very shortly thereafter, the e-fits were with British police who, themselves, chose the moment of their public release.
Where is the signed (and verified) statement from Mr. Smith saying this ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 12, 2015, 08:36:29 AM
Who, in their right minds, would produce an e-fit of a man they thought was Gerry?
Exactly right. Because neither e-fit closely resembles Gerry, when shown the e-fits by the artist, the Smiths would have said, "no that's not quite accurate" and simply given the artists a picture of Gerry and said "more like that please".
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: stephen25000 on September 12, 2015, 08:54:31 AM
Exactly right. Because neither e-fit closely resembles Gerry, when shown the e-fits by the artist, the Smiths would have said, "no that's not quite accurate" and simply given the artists a picture of Gerry and said "more like that please".
Now tell me if I'm wrong.
The man's face could not been clearly seen.
What Mr. Smith' 'recognized' was the way the child was being held.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 12, 2015, 09:46:42 AM
We know what was wrong with the facts in that article because the correction told us. It wasn't very seriously flawed at all. In fact just one aspect was changed.
At least that's as far as we know. If more was wrong with it we haven't been told, so you have nothing to support your claim it was "very seriously flawed". You're simply guessing, and isn't that what you're always telling us not to do?
If you wish to "guess" Lyall ~ be my guest ~ I neither have nor would dictate your actions or how you do things ~ that is entirely a matter for you and "us".
However it must be remembered ...
the Sunday Times printed an article featuring the Drs McCann
said article made accusation against them
the Drs McCann sued the Sunday Times for libel because the accusation was false
as a result, the Sunday Times paid damages of £55,000 to the Drs McCann which they donated to two charities
the Sunday times issued an apology to the Drs McCann
That seems remarkably clear cut to me.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: stephen25000 on September 12, 2015, 09:51:27 AM
If you wish to "guess" Lyall ~ be my guest ~ I neither have nor would dictate your actions or how you do things ~ that is entirely a matter for you and "us".
However it must be remembered ...
the Sunday Times printed an article featuring the Drs McCann
said article made accusation against them
the Drs McCann sued the Sunday Times for libel because the accusation was false
as a result, the Sunday Times paid damages of £55,000 to the Drs McCann which they donated to two charities
the Sunday times issued an apology to the Drs McCann
That seems remarkably clear cut to me.
Who commissioned the e-fits ?
Who then didn't release them ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on September 12, 2015, 09:57:36 AM
A couple of Freedom of Information requests to find out exactly when LP & SY were provided with the e-fits could go a long way to resolving this issue - provided that they were not rejected.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: G-Unit on September 12, 2015, 10:17:38 AM
Just to recap. The Sunday Times apologised because it wrote two articles;
We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused." http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/sunday-times-sued-mccanns-over-story-which-wrongly-claimed-evidence-was-withheld-police
So instead of publicising the e-fits in 2009, the McCanns passed them to two police forces, neither of whom were actively investigating the case at the time. Not the report, just the e-fits? Only in 2011 did the report come into the hands of the authorities, according to the wording of the apology.
Still no explanation of why they chose not to publicise the e-fits as they did with the 'Victria Beckham' e-fit.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 12, 2015, 10:22:06 AM
What Mr. Smith' 'recognized' was the way the child was being held.
There is at least one other mistaken identification in the files of the carrier and it is my opinion that both statements should be read together. When they are ... it becomes patently obvious that neither witness saw Dr McCann at the time and as recorded in their original witness statement.
An easy enough mistake to make given the saturation media coverage ... when one thinks of the CrimeWatch actor who was "identified" by separate witnesses as the murderer he had portrayed: but one which when it has been identified as being entirely wrong as in Mr McCluskey and Mr Smith's additional statements ... just should not be reiterated.
I've agonised for days over whether or not to contact the police about this because it is a terrible thing to accuse somebody of. It had just not crossed my mind that the child?s parents could in some way be involved in her disappearance.
I have watched a good deal of news coverage about the McCanns over the past week or so. Another thing which has played on my mind is the coverage of Mr McCann walking off the aeroplane holding one of his young children. The way he was holding the child over his left shoulder reminded me of the man carrying the child from the white van in Portugal.
Although I could not describe the male I'd seen in Portugal because he had his back to me, it was the particular way Mr. McCann held the child that made me think. He held the child over his left shoulder with his left arm supporting the child?s weight. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RI_Mc.htm
Email from John Hughes to DIC Portimao, C.C. to Stuart Prior
20th September 2007
after seeing the McCanns on the news on 9th Sept when they returned to UK he has not slept and is worried sick.
4135 to 4139 Additional statement from Martin Smith 2008.01.30 (English)
I saw Gerard McCann (sic) going down the plane stairs carrying one of his children on 9th September 2007 BBC news at 10 PM, I have been shown the video clip by Sergeant Hogan which I recognise.
A clip I have seen before on the Internet.
In relation to the video clips of Gerard McCann and the person I saw on 3rd May 2007 when I saw the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007 something struck me that it could have been the same person.
It was the way Gerard McCann turned his head down which was similar to what the individual did on 3rd May 2007 when we met him.
It may have been the way he was carrying the child either.
I would be 60-80% sure that it was Gerard McCann that I met that night carrying a child.
I am basing that on his mannerism in the way he carried the child off the plane.
After seeing the BBC news at 10 PM, footage on the 9th September 2007 I contacted Leicestershire police with this information. During that time I spoke to all my family members who were with me on the night of 3rd May 2007 about this and the only one who felt the same way as me was my wife. She had seen the video clip of Gerard McCann walking down the stairs of the plane earlier that day. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: stephen25000 on September 12, 2015, 10:24:08 AM
There is at least one other mistaken identification in the files of the carrier and it is my opinion that both statements should be read together. When they are ... it becomes patently obvious that neither witness saw Dr McCann at the time and as recorded in their original witness statement.
An easy enough mistake to make given the saturation media coverage ... when one thinks of the CrimeWatch actor who was "identified" by separate witnesses as the murderer he had portrayed: but one which when it has been identified as being entirely wrong as in Mr McCluskey and Mr Smith's additional statements ... just should not be reiterated.
I've agonised for days over whether or not to contact the police about this because it is a terrible thing to accuse somebody of. It had just not crossed my mind that the child?s parents could in some way be involved in her disappearance.
I have watched a good deal of news coverage about the McCanns over the past week or so. Another thing which has played on my mind is the coverage of Mr McCann walking off the aeroplane holding one of his young children. The way he was holding the child over his left shoulder reminded me of the man carrying the child from the white van in Portugal.
Although I could not describe the male I'd seen in Portugal because he had his back to me, it was the particular way Mr. McCann held the child that made me think. He held the child over his left shoulder with his left arm supporting the child?s weight. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RI_Mc.htm
Email from John Hughes to DIC Portimao, C.C. to Stuart Prior
20th September 2007
after seeing the McCanns on the news on 9th Sept when they returned to UK he has not slept and is worried sick.
4135 to 4139 Additional statement from Martin Smith 2008.01.30 (English)
I saw Gerard McCann (sic) going down the plane stairs carrying one of his children on 9th September 2007 BBC news at 10 PM, I have been shown the video clip by Sergeant Hogan which I recognise.
A clip I have seen before on the Internet.
In relation to the video clips of Gerard McCann and the person I saw on 3rd May 2007 when I saw the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007 something struck me that it could have been the same person.
It was the way Gerard McCann turned his head down which was similar to what the individual did on 3rd May 2007 when we met him.
It may have been the way he was carrying the child either.
I would be 60-80% sure that it was Gerard McCann that I met that night carrying a child.
I am basing that on his mannerism in the way he carried the child off the plane.
After seeing the BBC news at 10 PM, footage on the 9th September 2007 I contacted Leicestershire police with this information. During that time I spoke to all my family members who were with me on the night of 3rd May 2007 about this and the only one who felt the same way as me was my wife. She had seen the video clip of Gerard McCann walking down the stairs of the plane earlier that day. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm
Do you have signed and verified statements from Mr. Smith ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Mr Gray on September 12, 2015, 10:37:56 AM
as I have pointed out before...there is often a very simple answer to things that appear strange...and when you have the answer you can see how simple the explanation was
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 12, 2015, 10:48:05 AM
Do you have signed and verified statements from Mr. Smith ?
The Smith statement and the McCluskey statement which was given in good faith ... portray the same mistaken identification. The wording of both shows great similarities.
If you have a problem with working out the significance of that ... it is entirely your concern.
However it remains my opinion that based on his original statement of being unable to provide a detailed description of the man he said he saw and based on his later wholly erroneous identification ...is that Mr Smith played no part in constructing the efits under discussion.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on September 12, 2015, 10:49:36 AM
A couple of Freedom of Information requests to find out exactly when LP & SY were provided with the e-fits could go a long way to resolving this issue - provided that they were not rejected.
Perhaps ferryman with his extensive experience of submitting FOI requests could take on the task ? Oh no wait a minute.............!!
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: ferryman on September 12, 2015, 10:56:57 AM
The Smith statement and the McCluskey statement which was given in good faith ... portray the same mistaken identification. The wording of both shows great similarities.
If you have a problem with working out the significance of that ... it is entirely your concern.
However it remains my opinion that based on his original statement of being unable to provide a detailed description of the man he said he saw and based on his later wholly erroneous identification ...is that Mr Smith played no part in constructing the efits under discussion.
This is what Martin Smith said:
It's really very difficult to get a gauge of how detailed his description was from a statement taken in reported speech
— Regarding the description of the individual who carried the child he states that: he was Caucasian, around 175 to 180m in height. He appeared to be about 35/40 years old. He had an average build, a bit on the thin side. His hair was short, in a basic male cut, brown in colour. He cannot state if it was dark or lighter in tone. He did not wear glasses and had no beard or moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details partly due to the fact that the lighting was not very good. — He was wearing cream or beige-coloured cloth trousers in a classic cut. He did not see his shoes. He did not notice the body clothing and cannot describe the colour or fashion of the same. — He states that the child was female, about four years of age as she was similar to his granddaughter of the same age. She was a child of normal build, about a metre in height though not being absolutely certain of that as she was being carried. The child has blonde medium-hued hair, without being very light. Her skin was very white, typical of a Brit. He did not notice her eyes as she was asleep and her eyelids were closed. — She was wearing light-coloured pyjamas. He cannot state with certainty the colour. She was not covered by any wrap or blanket. He cannot confirm whether she was barefoot but in his group, they spoke about the child having no cover on her feet. — Urged, he states that the individual did not appear to be a tourist. He cannot explain this further. It was simply his perception given the individual's clothing. He states that the individual carried the child in his arms, with her head laying on the individual's left shoulder, that being to the right of the deponent. He adds that he did not hold the child in a comfortable position, suggesting [the carrying] not being habitual. — Having already seen various photographs of MADELEINE and televised images, states that the child who was carried by the individual could have been her. He cannot state this as fact but is convinced that it could have been MADELEINE, also the opinion shared by his family.
(Martin Smith)
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on September 12, 2015, 11:13:08 AM
It's really very difficult to get a gauge of how detailed his description was from a statement taken in reported speech
— Regarding the description of the individual who carried the child he states that: he was Caucasian, around 175 to 180m in height. He appeared to be about 35/40 years old. He had an average build, a bit on the thin side. His hair was short, in a basic male cut, brown in colour. He cannot state if it was dark or lighter in tone. He did not wear glasses and had no beard or moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details partly due to the fact that the lighting was not very good. — He was wearing cream or beige-coloured cloth trousers in a classic cut. He did not see his shoes. He did not notice the body clothing and cannot describe the colour or fashion of the same. — He states that the child was female, about four years of age as she was similar to his granddaughter of the same age. She was a child of normal build, about a metre in height though not being absolutely certain of that as she was being carried. The child has blonde medium-hued hair, without being very light. Her skin was very white, typical of a Brit. He did not notice her eyes as she was asleep and her eyelids were closed. — She was wearing light-coloured pyjamas. He cannot state with certainty the colour. She was not covered by any wrap or blanket. He cannot confirm whether she was barefoot but in his group, they spoke about the child having no cover on her feet. — Urged, he states that the individual did not appear to be a tourist. He cannot explain this further. It was simply his perception given the individual's clothing. He states that the individual carried the child in his arms, with her head laying on the individual's left shoulder, that being to the right of the deponent. He adds that he did not hold the child in a comfortable position, suggesting [the carrying] not being habitual. — Having already seen various photographs of MADELEINE and televised images, states that the child who was carried by the individual could have been her. He cannot state this as fact but is convinced that it could have been MADELEINE, also the opinion shared by his family.
(Martin Smith)
He also stated that he was unable to identify the individual in person or from photographs (wonder if he was shown photographs) ... if he couldn't identify anyone at the time, I believe it would be an impossibility to provide detailed facial details to enable the construction of efits many, many months after the event.
Of the three Smith statements we have seen ... not one could give a detailed description of the face ... I really think that whoever constructed the efits ... it was none of these.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: stephen25000 on September 12, 2015, 11:33:54 AM
The Smith statement and the McCluskey statement which was given in good faith ... portray the same mistaken identification. The wording of both shows great similarities.
If you have a problem with working out the significance of that ... it is entirely your concern.
However it remains my opinion that based on his original statement of being unable to provide a detailed description of the man he said he saw and based on his later wholly erroneous identification ...is that Mr Smith played no part in constructing the efits under discussion.
So there are signed statements by him retracting his original view then.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Mr Gray on September 12, 2015, 11:40:07 AM
Perhaps ferryman with his extensive experience of submitting FOI requests could take on the task ? Oh no wait a minute.............!!
So ferryman actually tried to get some actual facts rather than spending all day spouting irrelevant opinion On that basis he should definitely be congratulated
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: stephen25000 on September 12, 2015, 01:16:49 PM
So, you're now telling me the McCanns WERE happy with the e-fits are you?
They didn't look too happy on the CW program. In fact Kate looked very uncomfortable. Gerry had that blank look about him.
But, even without a face recognition, The time, place, attire of the man and child could have been exposed for attention- same way 'Tannerman' was.. Oh, his many photo fits were.....'interesting' some claim even entertaining...
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 13, 2015, 12:29:15 PM
They didn't look too happy on the CW program. In fact Kate looked very uncomfortable. Gerry had that blank look about him.
But, even without a face recognition, The time, place, attire of the man and child could have been exposed for attention- same way 'Tannerman' was.. Oh, his many photo fits were.....'interesting' some claim even entertaining...
Would Smithman have been more interesting or less important had he been described as a tubby grey Portuguese-looking man in a blue T-Shirt & jeans, carrying a young girl in pyjamas?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 13, 2015, 12:40:44 PM
Would Smithman have been more interesting or less important had he been described as a tubby grey Portuguese-looking man in a blue T-Shirt & jeans, carrying a young girl in pyjamas?
Interesting? What do you mean? I was highlighting the similarities of the photo fits of 'Tannerman' and 'Smithman'.
I was then asking why push one person of interest and NOT the other. Both are important in my opinion, to eliminate or investigate further.
Hmmm
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on September 13, 2015, 01:00:39 PM
Interesting? What do you mean? I was highlighting the similarities of the photo fits of 'Tannerman' and 'Smithman'.
I was then asking why push one person of interest and NOT the other. Both are important in my opinion, to eliminate or investigate further.
Hmmm
The only similarities are the clothing descriptions & both men were seen carrying a child within the timeframe Madeleine went missing. Is Smithman only important because of what he was described as wearing?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: jassi on September 13, 2015, 01:09:20 PM
Smithman is important because he has not yet been identified, nor his presence explained.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on September 13, 2015, 01:12:50 PM
The only similarities are the clothing descriptions & both men were seen carrying a child within the timeframe Madeleine went missing. Is Smithman only important because of what he was described as wearing?
You have lost the meaning of the post. I don't want to keep replying with the same sentence. If there was NO facial description of 'Smithman' as there was none for 'Tannerman'- then why not USE clothes as a description- same as was used to promote 'Tannerman' e-fit.
I.E both could have been promoted as suspects or people of interest, or people to be eliminated.
If this is still not clear then please just leave it, because it could be embarrassing.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly1.3 on April 09, 2016, 12:39:29 PM
Ok, so I have been away from this site for a while. But out of interest, the McCanns are still showing Tannerman on the main page of their official website. As we have established, SY have almost certainly ruled out that man are are focusing on the edits below.
Has anyone moved this story on at all -- has anyone asked the McCanns, or the webmaster, why the image is still there? Does seem a little sloppy if it hasn't been updated. Anyone got the official contact details for the McCanns or their webmaster? I'm happy to get in touch to put forward a suggestion that they place the SY e-fits below on the front page...
Ok, so I have been away from this site for a while. But out of interest, the McCanns are still showing Tannerman on the main page of their official website. As we have established, SY have almost certainly ruled out that man are are focusing on the edits below.
Has anyone moved this story on at all -- has anyone asked the McCanns, or the webmaster, why the image is still there? Does seem a little sloppy if it hasn't been updated. Anyone got the official contact details for the McCanns or their webmaster? I'm happy to get in touch to put forward a suggestion that they place the SY e-fits below on the front page...
I know, nearly two years after crimewatch? But still with NO context, of time and place, no different in any way to aussie woman.....which he WAS
maybe one of the supporters can put us right and explain why this is unimportant
On their "unidentified people of interest" page the supposed yacht-based child vendor woman of barcelona docks gets a fuller description than smithman does.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on April 10, 2016, 01:17:30 AM
I can only think that Crecheman has provided SY with information far more relevant & tangible which allowed the timeline to be moved on. Smithman is just a loose end to be tied up.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 10, 2016, 01:20:39 AM
I can only think that Crecheman has provided SY with information far more relevant & tangible which allowed the timeline to be moved on. Smithman is just a loose end to be tied up.
If timeline was moved on then smithman cant be a loose end?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 10, 2016, 01:21:40 AM
On their "unidentified people of interest" page the supposed yacht-based child vendor woman of barcelona docks gets a fuller description than smithman does.
We know all this, we know smithman efits have been ignored and other tenuous ones promoted
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on April 10, 2016, 01:27:55 AM
If timeline was moved on then smithman cant be a loose end?
Why not? If Crecheman holds the key to how Madeleine was taken from 5a, Smithman's sighting may well be unimportant as far as solving the case is concerned but needing to be cleared in the event of anyone eventually accused trying to use Smithman as a defence.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: mercury on April 10, 2016, 01:32:24 AM
Why not? If Crecheman holds the key to how Madeleine was taken from 5a, Smithman's sighting may well be unimportant as far as solving the case is concerned but needing to be cleared in the event of anyone eventually accused trying to use Smithman as a defence.
What? How does crecheman hold the key if he was an innocent dad Really dont follow
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on April 10, 2016, 01:38:36 AM
What? How does crecheman hold the key if he was an innocent dad Really dont follow
Crecheman was passing the front of 5a at around 9.15pm - after the "first door-move". Maybe he saw something, people in the car park, shutters being opened, a child being put into a car......who knows - just not a person dressed in similar attire to himself/Smithman.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 10, 2016, 02:03:49 AM
Why not? If Crecheman holds the key to how Madeleine was taken from 5a, Smithman's sighting may well be unimportant as far as solving the case is concerned but needing to be cleared in the event of anyone eventually accused trying to use Smithman as a defence.
It's not hard to work out how Smithman did it when you do a forensic analysis of the timeline. He had the luck of the Irish smiling on him on that quiet Thursday night but the Irish may come back to haunt him.
The police should have been contacted straight away and no tampering of the crime scene. Gerry was saying his daughter was abducted by paedos (McKenzie) but didn't urgently call the police straight away. You have to ask the question WHY NOT? That doesn't add up any way you try and twist it!
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: misty on April 10, 2016, 02:33:54 AM
It's not hard to work out how Smithman did it when you do a forensic analysis of the timeline. He had the luck of the Irish smiling on him on that quiet Thursday night but the Irish may come back to haunt him.
The police should have been contacted straight away and no tampering of the crime scene. Gerry was saying his daughter was abducted by paedos (McKenzie) but didn't urgently call the police straight away. You have to ask the question WHY NOT? That doesn't add up any way you try and twist it!
15- Processos Volume 15 Page 3903 TRANSLATION BY INES 15VOLUMEXVa_Page_3903
15VOLUMEXVa_Page_3904
15VOLUMEXVa_Page_3905
15VOLUMEXVa_Page_3906 Crimestoppers Bureau
Force : Leicestershire
Date: 16/09/2007
*snipped* Caller name: Graham McKenzie
Mr McKenzie states that:
On e hour into the search by holiday makers of the hotel and surrounding areas, about 23.00 hrs, Mr McKenzie approached the McCann's apartment from the bushes at the rear of the apartment.
He was searching the gardens. He did not know it was the McCann's apartment.
He saw Mr Gerry McCann standing alone in the doorway at the rear of the apartment talking on his mobile telephone.
. 15-Processos Volume XV Pages 3907 - 3908 15VOLUMEXVa_Page_3907
15VOLUMEXVa_Page_3908 HOLIDAY MAKER 06 DEC 07
Surname : Mackenzie
Forenames: Graham
Occupation : Company partner
Statement date: 06-12-2007
*snipped*
It was later that evening around 10 ' 11 that I heard a commotion on the complex, I decided to go out and see what was going on. I walked round a saw a group of people gathered. John Hill the resort manager was there with some of the Mark Warner staff. I heard that a little girl called Maddie was missing, at that point I did not realise which child it was. John Hill was organising a search of the complex as it was thought that she had wandered off at that point in time. I let (my wife) know what was going on and went to join the search. I went to search the area around the back of our apartment where there is a little garden with a big palm tree in the middle. I was looking in the shrubbery and the little gardens to the apartments.
I worked my way around the area, eventually coming around the back of the tennis courts and up towards what I now know to be the McCanns apartment a couple of hours later. I was looking in the little gardens on the poolside of that block, I was in the end garden when I heard a male voice, he sounded distraught his voice cracking with emotion. I looked to see who I now know to be Gerry McCann stood above me on the balcony/patio about 3 metres away speaking on a mobile phone. I cannot recall his exact words but I got the impression that he was speaking to perhaps a family member or someone he was very close to due to the nature of his conversation.
The call to the police had already been made, P/F, at 2241. Both the above entries in the files show the time the witness overheard the phone call later than 2241.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pegasus on April 10, 2016, 02:51:53 AM
Witness McKenzie's description of the phonecall he overheard:
"Mr McCann was absolutely distraught telling the person receiving the call that he feared she had been taken by paedophiles"
"He said something along the lines of there being paedophile gangs in Portugal and that they had abducted Madeleine. I was so shocked by this, having originally thought that she had just wandered off."
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly1.3 on April 10, 2016, 12:53:29 PM
So to summarise a timeline.
October 2007 - Jane Tanner's e-fit of a man carrying a child released. October 2013 -- Crimewatch airs. Jane Tanner's abductor ruled out by SY, after six years of misunderstanding. Smithman (below) identified for urgent tracking. October 2013-today -- Jane Tanner's abudctor remains on the front page of the Find Madeleine website, that is maintained indirectly by the McCann family. August 2015 -- Smithman takes permanent position on the website -- but not on the front page. April 2016 - 8 and a half years on from Tanner's sighting being ruled out by Scotland Yard ("We believe we have identified the man who was seen by Jane Tanner carrying a child at about 21.15 near the apartment G5A"), the image still remains on the front page.
October 2007 - Jane Tanner's e-fit of a man carrying a child released. October 2013 -- Crimewatch airs. Jane Tanner's abductor ruled out by SY, after six years of misunderstanding. Smithman (below) identified for urgent tracking. October 2013-today -- Jane Tanner's abudctor remains on the front page Find Madeleine website, that is maintained indirectly the McCann family. August 2015 -- Smithman takes permanent position on the website -- but not on the front page. April 2016 - 8 and a half years on from Tanner's sighting being ruled out by Scotland Yard ("We believe we have identified the man who was seen by Jane Tanner carrying a child at about 21.15 near the apartment G5A"), the image still remains on the front page.
October 2007 - Jane Tanner's e-fit of a man carrying a child released. October 2013 -- Crimewatch airs. Jane Tanner's abductor ruled out by SY, after six years of misunderstanding. Smithman (below) identified for urgent tracking. October 2013-today -- Jane Tanner's abudctor remains on the front page Find Madeleine website, that is maintained indirectly the McCann family. August 2015 -- Smithman takes permanent position on the website -- but not on the front page. April 2016 - 8 and a half years on from Tanner's sighting being ruled out by Scotland Yard ("We believe we have identified the man who was seen by Jane Tanner carrying a child at about 21.15 near the apartment G5A"), the image still remains on the front page.
Investigators in general. As I recall, McCanns said something to the effect that they didn't have resources to pursue both Tannerman & Smithman, so went for Tannerman which led nowhere.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on April 10, 2016, 05:56:48 PM
Investigators in general. As I recall, McCanns said something to the effect that they didn't have resources to pursue both Tannerman & Smithman, so went for Tannerman which led nowhere.
"As I recall" doesn't count as a cite, Jassie. You may very well be correct but a cite would be good to back up your comment.
So all the investigators in general who were paid by the fund to investigate Madeleine's case were involved in efitgate? or do you think it might have been one firm in particular?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: faithlilly on April 10, 2016, 06:34:17 PM
"As I recall" doesn't count as a cite, Jassie. You may very well be correct but a cite would be good to back up your comment.
So all the investigators in general who were paid by the fund to investigate Madeleine's case were involved in efitgate? or do you think it might have been one firm in particular?
SY seem to be satisfied with the credibility of the efit constructor.. Isn't that good enough ?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Brietta on April 10, 2016, 06:47:28 PM
SY seem to be satisfied with the credibility of the efit constructor.. Isn't that good enough ?
With all due respect ... Scotland Yard know exactly their purpose with regard to the the efit as well as its provenance ... posters like us on internet fora can only speculate. Sometimes it is worth remembering that 'a little knowledge is a dangerous thing'.
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 10, 2016, 06:50:48 PM
Truth of the Lie by G. Amaral
When Kate refers to the individual who allegedly abducted her child, she has no information other than that given to her by Jane, since she, herself, did not see him. But, the description she gives of him differs from that of Jane Tanner. The latter - extremely sure of herself, and who will be interviewed on several occasions - portrays a man dressed in light-coloured trousers, with hair down to his collar. Kate refers to long hair and jeans.
Gerald tells the police that Jane described to him - after midnight, during the night of May 3rd to May 4th - this stranger she allegedly saw going up the road; his hair was brown, he was between 30 and 40 years old and he was wearing light-coloured trousers. The first police officers to arrive on the premises are convinced that the parents put forward the hypothesis of abduction because Jane had talked about this man with the child. In their report, Jane's description is as follows: it was an individual dressed in light-coloured trousers and a dark shirt, he was 1.78m tall and was carrying a child, probably in pyjamas. She does not describe the pyjamas and doesn't mention any other detail.
Later, during the course of the morning of May 4th, the father gives the same brief description and refers back to Jane for additional details. The latter appears at the offices of the police judiciaire in Portimão at 11.30am. This time, the description is very precise: the individual, aged between 35 and 40, was thin and 1.70m tall; his hair was dark brown, falling over his collar; he was wearing cream or beige trousers, probably linen, a sort of anorak - but not very thick - and black shoes, classic in style. He was walking hurriedly, with a child in his arms. He was warmly dressed, the reason she thought he was not a tourist. The child appeared to be asleep - she only saw the legs -, had bare feet and was dressed in pyjamas, which were obviously cotton, light-coloured, probably white or pale pink, with a pattern - flowers maybe, but she isn't certain. Concerning the man, she states that she would recognise him from the back by his particular way of walking. The importance of this statement will be seen later.
Hardly fourteen hours have gone by since the child's disappearance and already Jane's version is known by many people. The father even referred to it during his statement, as can be seen above. Jane insists that she spoke solely to Gerald about this individual and then without going into details. It is only later that she related it all to the police.
Again, we notice an inconsistency. She was not aware, she says, of how Madeleine was dressed, which seems unlikely: on the night of the disappearance, Kate immediately gave a precise description of the clothes the little girl was wearing when she was put to bed.
Everybody knew they were looking for a little girl of nearly four, bare feet, dressed in light-coloured pyjamas on which there was a pink animal design. This description was relayed to all those who mobilised to find the child. How come Jane Tanner took no notice, she who, at that time, was the main witness in the case?
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: Gadfly1.3 on April 13, 2016, 09:21:49 PM
Still no change on the FM website. Did they not read SY's correspondence on Jane Tanner's sighting?
Still no change on the FM website. Did they not read SY's correspondence on Jane Tanner's sighting?
I doubt it Gadfly as they appear to have not even read their own documents they submitted to Companies House dated 21 Dec 2011 which as you can see removed the old object 2B.1.2.3
Title: Re: The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?
Post by: pathfinder73 on April 15, 2016, 11:30:30 PM
This report is 18 months prior to efits released in Oct 2013.
NEW PHOTO CLUE TO MADELEINE MCCANN CASE
Sunday March 11,2012 By James Murray
Irishman Martin Smith and members of his family saw a man carrying a child in his arms at about 10pm, about 45 minutes after the Tanner sighting. However, he was not asked to help produce a photofit. The Met refuses to discuss the details but it is expected that officers will approach Mr Smith and his family for help. Yard experts are looking at ways of improving the images to end with one pristine likeness of the “suspect”.