And Martin Smith said three weeks after the event ?it is not possible for him to recognise the individual in person or by photograph? and so I ask you the same question you ask regarding Aiofe (who let?s not forget she was so close to the man she could observe the tiny beige buttons on his trousers -lol) ?if Martin Smith couldn't remember the man's face in May why do you think that he would be able to remember it months after??.
You of course have to apply the double standard though don?t you? Aiofe could not be expected to remember the face but Martin Smith?s memory actually sharpened over the months because that?s what usually happens isn?t it? 58 year old men?s memory of past events does improve over the months to the point that, whereas three weeks after they can?t recognise that they passed the famous dad of the most famous missing child on the street, suddenly they recognise him 4 months later, yes that?s entirely to be expected.
If a witness in the Luke Mitchell case came forward with a similar case of ?improving memory syndrome? I wonder what you?d have to say about that. There?s a word for these double standards you exhibit, I?m sure you know the word I?m referring to.
I would absolutely agree with your first point if Martin Smith had identified the man he saw facially. He didn?t. What he said in his statement was:
? 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.?
So it was not Gerry?s face that Mr Smith recognised but a certain mannerism or posture. Now you can say ?what other way would you carry a child? but the witness obviously saw something in the sighting and Gerry?s mannerisms that he felt was out of the norm. Why didn?t the other witnesses apart from his wife pick it up? Peter, as we know was busy tending to his wife and Aiofe was a child?as were the other four members of the group?.and may not have appreciated the awkward way in which the child was being carried.
So we know 4 members of the group?s opinions. Martin and his wife thought it could be Gerry. Peter was distracted with his wife and he says that it was dark. Aiofe in May said that she wouldn?t recognise the individual.
Three of the group were 4, 6 and 10 and the 13 year old obviously had nothing to add or his statement would be in the files. Dig a little deeper and the ? only two of the group agreed? doesn?t seem quite as persuasive an argument for dismissing the sighting.
As to your point about Luke Mitchell, the most important witnesses Andrina Bryson and Jodie?s grandmother, sister and her sister?s boyfriend did change their statements and included information that wasn?t in their first ones.Luke?s brother also changed his statement but he had documents that supported the change.
