The investigation into the Smith family's sighting

[G-Unit]

Equally there is no evidence they weren't given all statements from witnesses in Luz on 3/5/07, without which they could not possibly carry out a proper investigation.

I think the point has been made that it's not possible to prove that the PJ received the questionnaires from LP. Therefore criticising them for not examining them isn't sustainable.

[sadie]

Don't think this is my belief at all.  "This bit isn't my view "So we end up with a compromise where Jane and Smith both see the same person carrying the same child but the man hung around PdL with a child in his arms for an hour or so between 9:15 and 10:15 PM." 
It is what we would have to believe if the alleged abduction occurred at 9:15 and the Smith sighting was relevant.

I disagree, Rob.

I believe that Tannerman had an accomplice who was likely female and OC staff, someone known to the children.  This accomplice lifted Madeleine, her head on his right arm .... and passed her over to Tannerman at the front entrance / door.  This manoevre caused her head to rest on Tannerman's left arm (as we see in the images)

I believe that Gerry and Jez talking in the street + Jane witnessing the (erm .. alleged) abductor caused the get- away driver to drive off rather than pick up Tannerman and Madeleine.

Meanwhile, IMO the accomplice went back to where she lived, likely in the Staff quarters building in Rua D'Escola and Tannerman left in the lurch went there ... before setting off again down Rua D'escola where he met the Smiths.

[Brietta]

I disagree, Rob.

I believe that Tannerman had an accomplice who was likely female and OC staff, someone known to the children.  This accomplice lifted Madeleine, her head on his right arm .... and passed her over to Tannerman at the front entrance / door.  This manoevre caused her head to rest on Tannerman's left arm (as we see in the images)

I believe that Gerry and Jez talking in the street + Jane witnessing the (erm .. alleged) abductor caused the get- away driver to drive off rather than pick up Tannerman and Madeleine.

Meanwhile, IMO the accomplice went back to where she lived, likely in the Staff quarters building in Rua D'Escola and Tannerman left in the lurch went there ... before setting off again down Rua D'escola where he met the Smiths.

I agree that Tannerman having an accomplice who might very well have been female is a workable scenario.  I'm still going with the window though, rather than the door.

I don't think he was Smithman; I think he was a different entity.

I think you are right in thinking something happened to Tannerman's get away car.  Whether that was because of Jez and Gerry's chance meeting or something else ... but having gone so far he had no choice but to keep going.
I don't think the original intention would have been to openly carry a child for any distance and risk being seen (as it turned out he was).
Or maybe he had left it at the small parking area outside Block 6 ??

[sadie]

I agree that Tannerman having an accomplice who might very well have been female is a workable scenario.  I'm still going with the window though, rather than the door.

I don't think he was Smithman; I think he was a different entity.

I think you are right in thinking something happened to Tannerman's get away car.  Whether that was because of Jez and Gerry's chance meeting or something else ... but having gone so far he had no choice but to keep going.
I don't think the original intention would have been to openly carry a child for any distance and risk being seen (as it turned out he was).
Or maybe he had left it at the small parking area outside Block 6 ??

I've ruled the window out because there were no fibres on the frame nor marks on the cill and the gap was too narrow for a man tio get thru without a lot of palava.  He would have left marks , fibres, scratches or dirt IMO  Also possibly finger prints.  Also look at the level that the cill is on photos and videos.  He couldn't have strode in, the cill on the outside was too high .... and it would have done him a serious damage had he tried.... OUCH !

Furthermore, try passing a floppy body thru a window that narrow.  One man on his own couldn't have done it and even with two people it would have been very tricky ....elbows and the like would have scraped the window frame IMO.

The door with a key is much easier.  ... and keys have been used it seems in earlier burglaries

- Key in
- Key turned .... door opens, and no touching necessary
- Leave key in door

- Exit pulling door to, using key
- Pass Madeleine over to somone
- Remove key without touching door and away we go !   No finger prints and very easy too.



Like you, I am quite sure that the original intention would not have been to carry Madeleine through the streets.   The get way car failed to arrive for some reason ... or possibly as you say he had left his car in the "little Car Park " outside block 6

AIMHO

[Robittybob1]

I'm surprised by Amaral's answer in this interview. "Portuguese cop: Met has finally caught up on McCann" https://youtu.be/PO3bCpVhSQQ

[G-Unit]

I'm surprised by Amaral's answer in this interview. "Portuguese cop: Met has finally caught up on McCann" https://youtu.be/PO3bCpVhSQQ

He doesn't say that as you would know if you watched the video instead of just reading the caption.

[Robittybob1]

He doesn't say that as you would know if you watched the video instead of just reading the caption.

I did watch it but I must admit I never detailed what I found surprising.  It was him blaming Rebelo for not following up on the Smith sighting.  I thought Amaral missed plenty of opportunity too.

[faithlilly]

Two highly trained professional investigations, one private, one official have ruled out Tannerman in favour of Smithman yet you stubbornly cling to him by your fingertips. Can I ask why Brietta?

[Robittybob1]

Sean looks completely comfortable during the minutes Gerry makes the speech. https://youtu.be/pepDNi7WSYs
"Gerry McCann's speech on return to the UK".

[Brietta]

I did watch it but I must admit I never detailed what I found surprising.  It was him blaming Rebelo for not following up on the Smith sighting.  I thought Amaral missed plenty of opportunity too.

I don't think the Amaral investigation paid the slightest heed to the Smith sighting after the three witnesses had visited the scene.

If memory serves me well ... it was the Rebello investigation which carried out the diligence of obtaining a receipt from Kelly's bar and interviewing the staff at the restaurant where the Smiths had dined, but who could not remember a family of nine.

[G-Unit]

I did watch it but I must admit I never detailed what I found surprising.  It was him blaming Rebelo for not following up on the Smith sighting.  I thought Amaral missed plenty of opportunity too.

Was he criticising or answering the question 'Why wasn't it investigated after you left?'

[Robittybob1]

I did watch it but I must admit I never detailed what I found surprising.  It was him blaming Rebelo for not following up on the Smith sighting.  I thought Amaral missed plenty of opportunity too.

Reporter "But if everyone thought it important ....  "  https://youtu.be/PO3bCpVhSQQ?t=66  He then blames his successor but he missed the opportunities himself.

[faithlilly]

I don't think the Amaral investigation paid the slightest heed to the Smith sighting after the three witnesses had visited the scene.

If memory serves me well ... it was the Rebello investigation which carried out the diligence of obtaining a receipt from Kelly's bar and interviewing the staff at the restaurant where the Smiths had dined, but who could not remember a family of nine.

What would you have expected the Amaral investigation to do once the Smiths had been taken through a reconstruction of the sighting? It was only after Martin Smith identified Gerry McCann as possibly the man he had seen that the minutiae of the timeline became important.

[Robittybob1]

What would you have expected the Amaral investigation to do once the Smiths had been taken through a reconstruction of the sighting? It was only after Martin Smith identified Gerry McCann as possibly the man he had seen that the minutiae of the timeline became important.

They should have done e-fits then.  If they couldn't do e-fits then how can they do e-fits later after seeing Gerry come of the plane?  Reverse that if they could do e-fits later they could have done e-fits earlier.

[misty]

Here's my theory for reading before it gets whooshed.

Amaral  never gave any credence to Jane Tanner's sighting, even less so when there were suspicions it was Murat.
I think he then saw Crecheman's statement & kept it in reserve as he pursued the McCanns. Once he had acquired enough "evidence" & they were charged, prosecution would have produced Crecheman so that the McCanns could not have used the unidentified Tannerman in defence of their claims of abduction. Whilst Smithman remained unidentified too, Tannerman could never be charged as Madeleine's abductor.
After the McCanns left Portugal & the PP didn't have enough evidence to charge them, cue M Smith to identify Smithman as Gerry. Take a fresh statement, move the time of the sighting on a bit then add that to all the other "evidence" which, in Amaral's eyes should have been enough. The presence of Crecheman could then have been revealed, Only it didn't work because Amaral was sidelined - so Crecheman's details remained buried & would have remained buried without the McCanns determination to get the investigation reopened.

IMO Crecheman was Amaral's Ace, which he never got to play - probably because he couldn't without incriminating himself after the UK authorities launched a review.

Amaral wants you to believe that Tannerman was Gerry & Smithman was Gerry - he said so in Chapter 20 of his book

Extract from Chapter 20 - An Irish Family In A State Of Shock.

"When we receive this information, at the end of September, we think we finally have the piece that will allow us to complete the puzzle. Because of this, we may be able to reconstruct the course of events on that cold night of May 3rd in Vila da Luz. We have a better understanding of why Jane Tanner, "sent," the alleged abductor in the opposite direction to that taken by the man seen by the Smith family. Suspicion had to be diverted from Gerald who - if he was the guilty party - would have taken this route: leaving apartment 5A, the individual who was carrying the child, did not go east, towards Murat's house, but west in the direction of the beach."


All my own opinion, exercising the same freedom of speech Amaral has been legally granted.