Re: Pat Brown - is still claiming, like Operation Grange and the McCanns, that 'Smithman' is the key to solving the Madeleine McCann mystery - and dismissing the evidence the Last Photo was taken on Sunday as 'irrelevant'

by **Jill Havern** 13.04.17 13:50

No matter how I try I cannot get my head around Gerry being Smithman.

If Maddie did die behind the sofa on the Thursday and she was found when they came back from dinner, allowing time for the cadaver scent to develop, when was she put in the blue bag that Eddie alerted to in the wardrobe and flowerbed etc?

Are we really supposed to think that Gerry carried a dead Maddie towards the beach then had to go and collect his further decomposing daughter at a later time/date? That risks being spotted twice as 'Smithman'. The second time would carry even more risk than the first time as Police/residents would still be looking and be more alert.

Or maybe he took the blue bag to go and collect her then put her in the wardrobe?

Why not just put her in the blue bag and take her to the beach, or wherever it was he was going? And bring her back in the blue bag? And then have Kate raise the alarm once he got back?

How could he even go and collect a decomposing Maddie when the Police and residents were out looking? How could he then put a decomposing Maddie in the wardrobe when the Police were still in and out of the apartment taking photos and DNA swabs etc? How long would Maddie have to be hidden on the beach, or wherever it was, before Gerry could safely collect her?

If he wanted to be spotted as the abductor then he also ran the risk of being identified as Gerry, not just by the Smiths, but by potentially many other people too - pointless exercise as they would just tell the Police that they saw Gerry walking around PdL with his daughter, so no abduction then.

I have to say I can't get my head around any Smithman theory whereby it could really be Gerry carrying a decomposing Maddie or even an alive substitute sleeping/drugged child.

And if it was a substitute child he was carrying where did he put her because presumably he had to get back to the apartment to play the panic-stricken dad of an abducted daughter?

Sorry for the confusing post, but that's because I'm confused about it all!

I'm not saying the Smiths didn't see someone, like CrecheDad, but for me it couldn't have been Gerry with a dead Maddie or an alive substitute child.

by polyenne 13.04.17 13:52

Roidininki wrote:
JRP wrote:I don't understand the logic.
A child is reported missing by the parents and to prove she's still alive, the father borrows another child from somebody and carries her around the streets.
But then doesn't that prove she wasn't missing at all, as she was with her father?

Just askin
You don't understand my logic?
Well she WASN'T missing on that night of the third ,rather her body had been taken , away that is , on a different date .
To support the abduction a pseudo Madeleine had to be seen in the arms of an adult male on the night of the 3rd .
Does that explain it better?

If one subscribes to that theory (I don't) one could agree but surely you can understand why it couldn't be Gerry.....the father can't be seen to be abducting his own daughter on the basis that he might be identified later

by willowthewisp 13.04.17 15:19

Hi GGG,the"Smith Family"made statements of having seen a person of a certain Height,age and clothing being worn by that person on 3 May 2007?
The"original time frame" 21.15-21.25pm, JT,JW,GMc,statements at the side of apartment 5a,Dave Edgars mockumentary,Tannerman?
You do not doubt that the"Smith Family"had seen a person like Creche Dad/Smithman but rule out GMc
as to carrying a substitute child or Madeleine?
I maybe wrong on this point,but didn't the Portugal PJ delay confirmation of the"Smith family"identifying a person with a child for several weeks after their statements?
Mr Smith has ruled out to the Portugal PJ of the Smithman sighting being(RM) Former Arquido?
Crime Watch October 2013,DCI Andy Redwood,the"Moving time moment of 55 minutes"Creche Dad has been accounted for to 22.00pm on the above date,(Smithman/Creche Dad) to Gerry's last check on his own Daughter,Madeleine in her bed apartment 5a 21.05pm alive and well.
Have the Portugal PJ spoken to DCI Andy Redwoods Creche Dad/Smithman in this"Joint Review Process"to rule that person in or out of any future suspects to Madeleine's missing person case?
Are Operation stGrange still looking for Smithman?

by Verdi 13.04.17 15:29

Pat Brown - is still claiming, like Operation Grange and the McCanns, that 'Smithman' is the key to solving the Madeleine McCann mystery - and dismissing the evidence the Last Photo was taken on Sunday as 'irrelevant' - Page 4 CCTV-footage-of-Wojciech-Krokowski

Krokowski

Pat Brown - is still claiming, like Operation Grange and the McCanns, that 'Smithman' is the key to solving the Madeleine McCann mystery - and dismissing the evidence the Last Photo was taken on Sunday as 'irrelevant' - Page 4 This-one

Tannerman Smithman

by JRP 13.04.17 15:31

Roidininki wrote:
JRP wrote:I don't understand the logic.
A child is reported missing by the parents and to prove she's still alive, the father borrows another child from somebody and carries her around the streets.
But then doesn't that prove she wasn't missing at all, as she was with her father?

Just askin
You don't understand my logic?
Well she WASN'T missing on that night of the third ,rather her body had been taken , away that is , on a different date .
To support the abduction a pseudo Madeleine had to be seen in the arms of an adult male on the night of the 3rd .
Does that explain it better?

Yeah I get it.
Why did she have to be seen in the arms of a male though?
I've never really tried body snatching, but thinking about it right now, I'd use a car, or like Get'em said, she'd use a bag.
I don't believe it anyway, it doesn't ring true to me at all.

by polyenne 13.04.17 15:36

Add in KMs cry of "they've taken her" as opposed to "she's been taken" or "she's gone" and you could be forgiven for thinking that there might have been more than one abductor

by willowthewisp 13.04.17 15:39

JRP wrote:
Roidininki wrote:
JRP wrote:I don't understand the logic.
A child is reported missing by the parents and to prove she's still alive, the father borrows another child from somebody and carries her around the streets.
But then doesn't that prove she wasn't missing at all, as she was with her father?

Just askin
You don't understand my logic?
Well she WASN'T missing on that night of the third ,rather her body had been taken , away that is , on a different date .
To support the abduction a pseudo Madeleine had to be seen in the arms of an adult male on the night of the 3rd .
Does that explain it better?

Yeah I get it.
Why did she have to be seen in the arms of a male though?
I've never really tried body snatching, but thinking about it right now, I'd use a car, or like Get'em said, she'd use a bag.
I don't believe it anyway, it doesn't ring true to me at all.

Hi JRP,A male person was identified by JT and the Smith Family as to have been in close proximity to the Apartment 5a,Ocean Club,seen carrying a young Girl between 21.15-22.00pm 3 May 2007.

by **Jill Havern** 13.04.17 15:39

Hi willowthewisp, can you please outline a scenario for me where Gerry could be carrying a dead decomposing Maddie or a substitute child on the evening of May 3rd away from the apartment.

And please tell me how he could have got Maddie back to the apartment, so that the dogs could alert at the wardrobe and flowerbed.

And if he was carrying a substitute, as a pretendy abductor, then what could he have done with this child?

I genuinely want to understand Smithman.

by willowthewisp 13.04.17 16:11

Get'emGonçalo wrote:Hi willowthewisp, can you please outline a scenario for me where Gerry could be carrying a dead decomposing Maddie or a substitute child on the evening of May 3rd away from the apartment.

And please tell me how he could have got Maddie back to the apartment, so that the dogs could alert at the wardrobe and flowerbed.

And if he was carrying a substitute, as a pretendy abductor, then what could he have done with this child?

I genuinely want to understand Smithman.

Hi GGG, first of all I do not think I have ever stated that Madeleine McCann is Dead,but I stand to be corrected if I have stated to Madeleine's well being being the opposite!
I have been trying to follow the Forum rules of known facts which can be proven.
I do not doubt the Evidence from Martin Grimes dogs Eddie,Keela and to what they have alerted to in apartment 5a or the families other address.
In regard to a scenario of Gerry and your chosen words.
I would at the present moment wait for any Criminal Evidence to be produced to a Court of Law to decide upon a person's being found Guilty or Not Guilty to any Criminal Activity with regard to a missing child,Madeleine McCann.
In fact I await for any"Prosecutions" for any Criminal activity in relation to the Madeleine McCann case?
The UK Government would have to construct several new structures to house the Guilty parties,which they know too well with regard to Madeleine McCann and if you care to look at the unsolved Murder of Daniel Morgan you will have some idea of what an Establishment can Cover Up,Hillsborough!!?
PS,in light of how the UK MSM treated Mrs Brenda Leyland in regard to Madeleine McCann's disappearance,Sky News Corporation,Martin Brunt,just what where you doing in Portugal in relation to any missing person programme,remember your 100% DNA Sky News,eh Martin and your secret telephone conversations to (RM)Contract?

by **Jill Havern** 13.04.17 16:15

OK, fair enough...maybe someone else can describe a scenario then, as asked in my previous post, where Gerry was Smithman on the basis that Maddie did die on Thursday and he was seen walking towards the beach.

by willowthewisp 13.04.17 16:50

Get'emGonçalo wrote:OK, fair enough...maybe someone else can describe a scenario then, as asked in my previous post, where Gerry was Smithman on the basis that Maddie did die on Thursday and he was seen walking towards the beach.

Hi GGG,The Metropolitan Police Service,Operation stGrange,will not confirm or Deny Martin Grimes, Crime dogs alerts from Eddie,Keela,but what a good idea to have filmed what they had alerted too.
In fact,Police Officers from the"Homocide Unit"are involved with Operation Grange and Sir Bernard hogan Howe(Faux Pah) quickly corrected himself on his LBC Broadcast with regard to Madeleine McCann?
The UK public would have been much less informed but for the"Release"of the Portugal PJ files,now that was something Team McCann had not considered?
This is the only reason of where we are today in regard to missing Madeleine McCann,with out the release and transfer to English of the PJ files?

by **Jill Havern** 13.04.17 17:06

I still want to see a scenario from someone, anyone, whereby:

1. Maddie died behind the sofa on Thursday 3rd May

2. Gerry was seen by the Smiths walking towards the beach

3. The dogs alerted to the wardrobe where the blue bag was photographed

4. The dogs alerted to the hire car.

If Gerry was Smithman:

1. How did he get Maddie back from wherever he was going so that she could then be stored in a freezer and transported 3 weeks later in the hire car.

2. If Gerry was seen by the Smiths with a substitute then what could have happened to that child and how did she get back to her rightful parents

...while PdL was buzzing with Police and residents searching?

If Gerry took either a decomposing corpse or a substitute child towards the beach that night, then something must have happened after that.

How does Smithman fit into what we are led to believe by Amaral and the PJ that Maddie died in the apartment and her corpse was concealed?

by willowthewisp 13.04.17 17:28

Hi GGG,I don't Know if you have read the Textusa article,Dave Edgar,but that article alludes to certain persons that may fit into a scenario as part of an Abduction,thesis?
If the Tapas Statements timelines are true,they depict a possibility as to what may have happened,but,the "Truth" will only come out in a Court of Law,as to what can be proven beyond a Reasonable doubt?
PS, I am not stating Textusa is Right or Wrong it is a thesis?

by **Jill Havern** 13.04.17 17:36

No, I haven't read it.

But there are members here who believe Maddie died during the evening of Thursday 3rd May and that the person who the Smiths saw was Gerry McCann.

So please give me a brief scenario of where he could be going, how long Maddie would have to be hidden, how he got Maddie back so the dogs could alert at the wardrobe and flowerbed, or how he got the substitute back as in my previous posts while the place was buzzing with Police.

Tell me. I want to believe Gerry was Smithman.

But I don't want to go and wade through a Textusa article.

by Columbo 13.04.17 17:50

Get'emGonçalo wrote:No matter how I try I cannot get my head around Gerry being Smithman.

I have to say I can't get my head around any Smithman theory whereby it could really be Gerry carrying a decomposing Maddie or even an alive substitute sleeping/drugged child.

And if it was a substitute child he was carrying where did he put her because presumably he had to get back to the apartment to play the panic-stricken dad of an abducted daughter?

Sorry for the confusing post, but that's because I'm confused about it all!

I'm not saying the Smiths didn't see someone, like CrecheDad, but for me it couldn't have been Gerry with a dead Maddie or an alive substitute child.

I agree Get'em, it is all most confusing.

I'm of the view that no-one was carrying any child in their arms around PdL around 9pm that night. I did wonder if some perfectly innocent person had in fact been carrying their sleeping child and the co-incidence of this and the disappearance, along with JT's story - and I think it is just that, a story - had thrown confusion and maybe a red herring into the mix.

But, any innocent person carrying a child could have been identified and eliminated very early on. No 'abductor' would walk casually through the streets with a kidnapped child - not even the stupidest of criminals.

Smithman/Tannerman/Crecheman have sown confusion - as I think they were meant to - and if I were trying to solve the case I'd go as far as to say I'd ignore them.

by **Jill Havern** 13.04.17 18:01

Columbo wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:No matter how I try I cannot get my head around Gerry being Smithman.

I have to say I can't get my head around any Smithman theory whereby it could really be Gerry carrying a decomposing Maddie or even an alive substitute sleeping/drugged child.

And if it was a substitute child he was carrying where did he put her because presumably he had to get back to the apartment to play the panic-stricken dad of an abducted daughter?

Sorry for the confusing post, but that's because I'm confused about it all!

I'm not saying the Smiths didn't see someone, like CrecheDad, but for me it couldn't have been Gerry with a dead Maddie or an alive substitute child.

I agree Get'em, it is all most confusing.

I'm of the view that no-one was carrying any child in their arms around PdL around 9pm that night. I did wonder if some perfectly innocent person had in fact been carrying their sleeping child and the co-incidence of this and the disappearance, along with JT's story - and I think it is just that, a story - had thrown confusion and maybe a red herring into the mix.

But, any innocent person carrying a child could have been identified and eliminated very early on. No 'abductor' would walk casually through the streets with a kidnapped child - not even the stupidest of criminals.

Smithman/Tannerman/Crecheman have sown confusion - as I think they were meant to - and if I were trying to solve the case I'd go as far as to say I'd ignore them.

I also don't believe Gerry was Smithman, but there are members here who do believe Maddie died on Thursday and Gerry was seen walking towards the beach and I'd love to hear their theories about what could have happened after they believe Gerry was seen by the Smiths walking towards the beach.

I've been asking for this theory for more than 4 hours now and....nothing! Why?

by willowthewisp 13.04.17 18:16

Get'emGonçalo wrote:No, I haven't read it.

But there are members here who believe Maddie died during the evening of Thursday 3rd May and that the person who the Smiths saw was Gerry McCann.

So please give me a brief scenario of where he could be going, how long Maddie would have to be hidden, how he got Maddie back so the dogs could alert at the wardrobe and flowerbed, or how he got the substitute back as in my previous posts while the place was buzzing with Police.

Tell me. I want to believe Gerry was Smithman.

But I don't want to go and wade through a Textusa article.

Hi GGG,The Brief Scenario,Textusa,Thesis.
JT has awaits with her daughter inside 5a.
JW sees GMC outside of apartment,then has to wait for JW to clear the area.
GMc,then takes his own Daughter to (RM's) property,stored in a motor vehicle until 04.00 4 May 2007.
GMc returns to 5a,picks up (JT's daughter) travels towards the Beach Area.
After being spotted by the Family,returns promptly to Ocean Club to return (JTs daughter to her family,then they proceed with the supposed Abduction Thesis alert to GNR.
This is a brief version of the Textusa article,please do not shoot the messenger,it's a Thesis?

by Liz Eagles 13.04.17 18:22

willowthewisp wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:No, I haven't read it.

But there are members here who believe Maddie died during the evening of Thursday 3rd May and that the person who the Smiths saw was Gerry McCann.

So please give me a brief scenario of where he could be going, how long Maddie would have to be hidden, how he got Maddie back so the dogs could alert at the wardrobe and flowerbed, or how he got the substitute back as in my previous posts while the place was buzzing with Police.

Tell me. I want to believe Gerry was Smithman.

But I don't want to go and wade through a Textusa article.
Hi GGG,The Brief Scenario,Textusa,Thesis.
JT has awaits with her daughter inside 5a.
JW sees GMC outside of apartment,then has to wait for JW to clear the area.
GMc,then takes his own Daughter to (RM's) property,stored in a motor vehicle until 04.00 4 May 2007.
GMc returns to 5a,picks up (JT's daughter) travels towards the Beach Area.
After being spotted by the Family,returns promptly to Ocean Club to return (JTs daughter to her family,then they proceed with the supposed Abduction Thesis alert to GNR.
This is a brief version of the Textusa article,please do not shoot the messenger,it's a Thesis?

Textusa's blog should come with the warning of 'you are now entering a parallel universe'.

by Carrry On Doctor 13.04.17 18:31

For the benefit of newbies, Lazzeri has been a prominent and respected commentator over the years, and in 2012 offered the following on the Smith sighting;

http://l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com/Smith_Sighting.html

The reason (on balance) I believe the Smith sighting is genuine comes down to the following paragraphs......

Some are suggesting that the Smith sighting never happened at all.

I would have to disagree.

I cannot see that an entire family (as far as we know, who are not connected in any way to the McCanns or to Murat, other than Murat is known to them by sight, as he is a prominent figure in Praia da Luz known by many and where the Smith family own a property) would invent such a tale.

Martin Smith’s young daughter, who was around 11/12 years of age at the time of the sighting, gave a witness statement to police also.

If for no other reason, this would make me inclined to believe the family did in fact see a man carrying a child. I cannot imagine that a girl so young would be able to carry off when interviewed by police a scam such as pretending she saw something she did not. I would imagine for anyone giving a police witness statement it would be somewhat distressing especially in the case of a missing child. For a girl so young to have had to do so, I just cannot believe that she would have been able to lie, and why would she?

I have no doubt whatsoever that the Smith family saw what they said they did. There is not a reason in the world that I know of for them to have lied.

And not a reason in the world for loving caring parents to put their daughter through the ordeal of giving a police witness statement unless the child had something important to tell regarding what she witnessed on the night Madeleine vanished. Something which may have helped recover the missing child.

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that the Smith's are anything other than what they appear to be - a decent caring and honest family.

by willowthewisp 13.04.17 18:45

Hi carryonDoctor,thanks for the Lazzari article!

by **Jill Havern** 13.04.17 18:49

willowthewisp wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:No, I haven't read it.

But there are members here who believe Maddie died during the evening of Thursday 3rd May and that the person who the Smiths saw was Gerry McCann.

So please give me a brief scenario of where he could be going, how long Maddie would have to be hidden, how he got Maddie back so the dogs could alert at the wardrobe and flowerbed, or how he got the substitute back as in my previous posts while the place was buzzing with Police.

Tell me. I want to believe Gerry was Smithman.

But I don't want to go and wade through a Textusa article.
Hi GGG,The Brief Scenario,Textusa,Thesis.
JT has awaits with her daughter inside 5a.
JW sees GMC outside of apartment,then has to wait for JW to clear the area.
GMc,then takes his own Daughter to (RM's) property,stored in a motor vehicle until 04.00 4 May 2007.
GMc returns to 5a,picks up (JT's daughter) travels towards the Beach Area.
After being spotted by the Family,returns promptly to Ocean Club to return (JTs daughter to her family,then they proceed with the supposed Abduction Thesis alert to GNR.
This is a brief version of the Textusa article,please do not shoot the messenger,it's a Thesis?

I'm not going to shoot the messenger, willowthewisp, I just want to explore and understand how people believe Gerry could be Smithman.

So, Gerry takes a decomposing Maddie to Murat's property (presumably in the blue bag, having laid the bag in the flowerbed while he waits for JW to clear the area) and stores her in a car (not a freezer) until the early morning of 4th May when she would be decomposing even more. And why 4 am?

Gerry returns to the apartment to pick up JT's daughter and goes towards the beach, presumably wanting to be seen then, because with Maddie safely out of the way then the abduction would go well - abductor comes in, takes her, and vanishes into thin air. Job done.

But Gerry decides to elaborate and returns to the apartment to risk a pretendy abduction with JT's daughter - and was only seen walking towards the beach but not back again?

He was lucky, then, not to be seen on the return journey with JT's daughter because that would put a spanner in the works. Abductor takes 'Maddie' (JT's daughter) but then is seen bringing her back again? And what if the Smiths didn't see him walking towards the beach but, instead, saw him walking back towards the apartment? Or, worse, if someone else saw him walking back towards the apartment?

How could Gerry be sure the elaborate faked abduction would work and he wouldn't be seen by other holidaymakers/residents/OC staff? If a whole family could see him, then why not other people?

Risky. Unless Martin Smith was in on it, was in the right place at the right time, and he didn't tell the rest of his family, hence there would be no need for them to lie.

thinking

And I still don't get it.

by willowthewisp 13.04.17 19:06

Hi GGG,I know you have doubts about the Madeleine McCann Case,Smithman/Tannerman/Creche Dad?
DCI Andy Redwood has supposedly met with Creche Dad,has he introduced him to the Portugal PJ under the "Joint working,Review"?
At 22.00 pm 3 May 2007, Crime Watch October 2013 DCI Andy Redwood has a sighting of Creche Dad taking his daughter home in the"Opposite direction" site of the Ocean club night Creche?
As you are well aware,Operation Grange,DCI Andy Redwood,DCs Hamish Campbell have issued various statements declaring the Tapas friends and the Parents of Madeleine McCann as not suspects into Madeleine's disappearance!?
GGG,you state why 04.00am,that was when the GNR closed down operations for that time,you also state decomposition,the weather was described as being a cold temperature in Portugal,JT wearing a fleece,21.00pm the evening of the disappearance?
Two Tapas friends were out early on the 4 May 2007,then Kate and Gerry began searching for Madeleine at 06.30 am?
Enough said for now.

by hogwash 13.04.17 19:27

Eddie and Keela searched Murat's property didn't they, and didn't alert?

by willowthewisp 13.04.17 19:31

hogwash wrote:Eddie and Keela searched Murat's property didn't they, and didn't alert?

Hi Hogwash,The dogs may have searched the property,but the article from Textusa quotes placed in a motor vehicle?

by hogwash 13.04.17 19:48

willowthewisp wrote:
hogwash wrote:Eddie and Keela searched Murat's property didn't they, and didn't alert?
Hi Hogwash,The dogs may have searched the property,but the article from Textusa quotes placed in a motor vehicle?

They alerted to the McCann's hire car, so placing a body in a motor vehicle at Murat's property wouldn't have deterred them from finding cadavar scent.

Pat Brown - is still claiming, like Operation Grange and the McCanns, that 'Smithman' is the key to solving the Madeleine McCann mystery - and dismissing the evidence the Last Photo was taken on Sunday as 'irrelevant'

Pat Brown or Rchard Hall