Is it true the PJ may have "Smithman" on video?

[jassi]

The Man was going away from apartment block 4 and 5 with a limp child held across his arms.  - highly significant observation IMO.

Who claims a 'limp child'?  Is this one of Tanners revisions ?

[Robittybob1]

Equally good answers   

How can we be sure JT was correct about the direction travelled? 

What does Dr Totman have to say?  Is he able to shed any light on direction travelled?

Next time you see something go past you are you ever confused about whether it went this way or that way?
The only time when someone says it went in the wrong direction is when they set out to lie.

Did you see which way the thief went?
He went that way (lie)
Said because he was an accomplice.

[Robittybob1]

Totman says he was the man seen carrying his child that night, to his apartment

If this is correct and OG aren't denying it, then Tanner was wrong, either accidentally or deliberately.
 and there was no man walking away from 5A at that time.

My point is it can be done deliberately but never accidentally.  If it was done deliberately does that imply she is an accomplice to those that caused Madeleine to go missing?  It becomes pretty crucial to work out what the truth is here.

[Robittybob1]

https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/07/madeleine-mccann-police-wasted-years-hunting-man-already-spoken-7527943/

"Wife Rachel told the Sun: ‘My husband had told the local police it could be him but we didn’t hear anything for years. ‘We always thought it was Julian who was seen by Jane Tanner. But the national police who investigated didn’t get back to us and we don’t know if our information was ever passed on.’


Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/07/madeleine-mccann-police-wasted-years-hunting-man-already-spoken-7527943/?ito=cbshare

Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/

I still think it was his wife who is trying to clear up the situation.  Has she got the story wrong?

[jassi]

My point is it can be done deliberately but never accidentally.  If it was done deliberately does that imply she is an accomplice to those that caused Madeleine to go missing?  It becomes pretty crucial to work out what the truth is here.

I've always thought that Tanner was trying to be 'helpful' to the McCanns, to the extent that she made stuff up.
Just my opinion, you understand. 

[The General]

I've always thought that Tanner was trying to be 'helpful' to the McCanns, to the extent that she made stuff up.
Just my opinion, you understand. 

Could be some of that going on.

[barrier]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-4fp4kPi60

As I said no mention of a name by Redwood.

[Brietta]

https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/07/madeleine-mccann-police-wasted-years-hunting-man-already-spoken-7527943/

I asked you ... "Where does Dr Totman say that?" ... but the cite you have provided although interesting does not provide the answer.
Dr Totman is not quoted in that newspaper report; but what comes over loud and clear is that apparently he as a vital witness was either ignored or his statement to the Portuguese police was lost.  Much as inertia caused the CCTV recording at Estela da Luz to be overwritten because no-one bothered to check it out.

___________________________________________________

Snip
He walked a few steps and looked up at a CCTV camera and sighed loudly. The camera belongs to the Estrela da Luz resort hotel. “I believe that the person carrying a child in his arms was captured on film from that very camera,” he said.

“I asked my officers to gather all the CCTV footage in Luz but, by the time they got to this hotel, the film from this camera had been wiped over. It was a mistake and I will always regret it. I do feel Madeleine was let down.” Amaral
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/210032/Madeleine-McCann-Did-the-camera-hold-vital-clue



Snip
Police investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann spent years trying to identify a man who had already made himself known to them.

Julian Totman told police in 2007 that it was probably him in a sketch released of a man who was seen carrying a child around the same time Madeleine disappeared.

___________________________________________________

But Mr Totman, a GP, had already told the Guarda Nacional Republicana in May that he could be the man seen by Ms Tanner that night.

Wife Rachel told the Sun: ‘My husband had told the local police it could be him but we didn’t hear anything for years.

‘We always thought it was Julian who was seen by Jane Tanner. But the national police who investigated didn’t get back to us and we don’t know if our information was ever passed on.’

Rachel, who lives with Julian in the West Country, said police in the UK and Portugal never got back to them.

https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/07/madeleine-mccann-police-wasted-years-hunting-man-already-spoken-7527943/

___________________________________________________

[Robittybob1]

Brietta - do you think this adds up to the Totmans being the ones identified by SY and mentioned by Redwood?

Do you think it was the Totmans who kept those tatty pyjamas all those years?

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-24528530
"Police have been revealing their latest findings in the search for her on BBC One's Crimewatch programme."

[Robittybob1]

The man identified by SY had a 2 year old daughter.  Was the Totman's daughter that age?

"DCI Redwood said it was a "revelation moment" when police discovered that the man seen by McCanns' friend Jane Tanner at 9.15pm was almost certainly an innocent British holiday-maker collecting his two-year-old daughter from a nearby creche."

The Weinbergers had a daughter same age as Madeleine in 2007. 
"Dr Paul Weinberger


Dr Paul Jerome Weinberger is now aged 46, and was just 37 when he was on holiday with the McCanns in 2007.   

He was there that week with his wife Jeni Catriona Weinberger, who is a big noise in the art world, being - amongst other things - the Founder and Director of The Get Mucky Art School.

They had a child aged the same age as Madeleine in 2007." https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15166-the-mccann-totman-weinberger-nexus

[Robittybob1]

This looks interesting.  Were the Totmans even staying in Block 4G on the 3rd?

"The Totmans, with their two children aged 3 and 2, arrived in Praia da Luz on the 28th April and stayed in Apartment G4M, apparently just for their second week.There is this strange reference at the foot of their booking sheet, which says;

“Please note that activity list will only be showing 2nd week, but guest requires 2 weeks childcare from 28th April”. https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15166-the-mccann-totman-weinberger-nexus


If that is true the Totmans were not staying in G4M on the 3rd.  This might explain why he was going the wrong way!

How true any of this is a guess.  The facts need verification.  Does anyone know?

[Robittybob1]

The Totman's children 3 and 2 was the daughter just 2 years of age?

"After collecting his daughter from a creche at the resort in Praia da Luz in 2007, Julian Totman said he walked near the McCann's apartment holding his then two-year-old child, the Mirror reports ." https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/man-madeleine-mccann-detectives-spent-1541229

[jassi]

This looks interesting.  Were the Totmans even staying in Block 4G on the 3rd?

"The Totmans, with their two children aged 3 and 2, arrived in Praia da Luz on the 28th April and stayed in Apartment G4M, apparently just for their second week.There is this strange reference at the foot of their booking sheet, which says;

“Please note that activity list will only be showing 2nd week, but guest requires 2 weeks childcare from 28th April”. https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15166-the-mccann-totman-weinberger-nexus


If that is true the Totmans were not staying in G4M on the 3rd.  This might explain why he was going the wrong way!

How true any of this is a guess.  The facts need verification.  Does anyone know?

Presumably there would be a link to the booking form in the files that could be checked, as I certainly wouldn't care to solely take the word of a somewhat dubious fourm

[Holly Goodhead]

Next time you see something go past you are you ever confused about whether it went this way or that way?
The only time when someone says it went in the wrong direction is when they set out to lie.

Did you see which way the thief went?
He went that way (lie)
Said because he was an accomplice.

It would depend on many different factors:

- How much attention I was paying
- Visibility in terms of light
- Time of day ie I'm inclined to be more alert first thing than say circa 9pm
- Whether or not I had consumed any booze and how much
- Line of sight

JT may have suffered 'confirmation bias' where she makes the observation which at the time was irrelevant to her.  She then learns of MM's disappearance and the observation takes on a whole new meaning and in her minds eye this hitherto irrelevant observation becomes MM's abductor walking away from 5A. 

[jassi]

It would depend on many different factors:

- How much attention I was paying
- Visibility in terms of light
- Time of day ie I'm inclined to be more alert first thing than say circa 9pm
- Whether or not I had consumed any booze and how much
- Line of sight

JT may have suffered 'confirmation bias' where she makes the observation which at the time was irrelevant to her.  She then learns of MM's disappearance and the observation takes on a whole new meaning and in her minds eye this hitherto irrelevant observation becomes MM's abductor walking away from 5A.

I would agree with that.