You do twist yourself into all kinds of shapes to explain the unexplainable Misty. There is nothing from newspaper reports to interviews to Kate’s book which even suggests the McCanns were stopped from publicising the Smith efits. Don’t you think that if there had been a genuine investigative reason we would have been told it at the time of the Times article ? After all the journalist did seem to have a contact within the fund.
The whole situation was designed to tie everyone up in knots, Faithlilly and what a cracking job someone did.
I have no idea what was behind the real decision not to publish the efits before 2013 but here's my take on the situation (Libelling & harassing an innocent person aside)
We know in January 2008 that Martin told the police he had been approached by Kennedy to produce efits.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P16/16_VOLUME_XVIa_Page_4135.jpg"He has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits. He sent a solicitor's letter to six papers in relation material that was printed that was misquoted. The Evening Herald paid his solicitor's fees and all papers printed an apology. His photograph appeared in another tabloid paper and this matter is being pursued at the moment."
Why not produce them at that time? Answer - because that would have invalidated his testimony given to the PJ in May 2007. He would therefore have not been able to testify against Gerry should the need have arisen.
Fast forward to August 2008.
The case was shelved. Murat was off the hook. The McCanns were off the hook despite the dog alerts, their failure to take part in the requisite reconstruction & Martin's identification of Gerry.
The McCanns appeared to be firmly of the belief that Tannerman was the abductor. What better way to throw a team of PI's off track than by suddenly producing efits of another man seen carrying a child who definitely wasn't Murat or Gerry, both of whom had alibis which seemed to satisfy the PJ at the time?
However, producing those efits at that time served a dual purpose for the Smiths . It meant not only that MS could not testify against Gerry but also against any person subsequently named as the person in the efits (who MS had said was probably Gerry). All the Smith family members who gave statements in May 2007 said they wouldn't recognise the man again, so an ID parade would have been pointless. Much more evidence than eye witness testimony would have been required & how would that have been acquired?
I think that by releasing the efits on Crimewatch in 2013, SY have effectively removed any chance of the Smiths ever testifying against the McCanns.
If the McCanns had published the efits, the Portuguese would have ridiculed the Smith family for a)not producing the efits for the PJ when the investigation was open and b)for conspiring with the McCanns to divert attention away from Gerry, towards another potential abductor. That would have been of no benefit to either the PJ/Amaral & his book or any other team trying to progress the case. The status quo definitely worked in favour of certain people - at least, until SY found Crecheman.
All IMO.
