The Smithman e-fits - are the McCanns less than happy with them?

[G-Unit]

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.

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'.

[Miss Taken Identity]

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.

[sadie]

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.

[mercury]

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.

and @ G-Unit

It depends on which parts of  the MSM are "right"

In this C4 news video it's stated they were never handed over to the Portuguese police.

http://youtu.be/oPe35lxZ-1g

The Times, in it's apology after they published  the story about the efits being hidden for five years, doesn't really clarify much.

[pathfinder73]

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.

[sadie]

Maybe she would have in a line-up. It may have brought that memory back.

There was no line up, so what are you going on about?

Speculating again?

[ShiningInLuz]

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.

[ShiningInLuz]

What's this then? Yet again...


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."

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/regulars/corrections/article1357081.ece

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.

[Brietta]

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?

[G-Unit]

What question do you think that raises?

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.

[faithlilly]

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 ?

[Brietta]

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.

[G-Unit]

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

[pegasus]

http://findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html

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).

[faithlilly]

http://findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html

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.