The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Mm11

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Regist10
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums as some of them are 'members only', then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When you register please do NOT use your email address for a username because everyone will be able to see it!

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Mm11

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Regist10

Possible Action Against The Times

Page 11 of 16 Previous  1 ... 7 ... 10, 11, 12 ... 16  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Dr What 07.08.14 19:56

Whilst building a case, I was always taught to concentrate on what one knows, not on what one thinks.

What we know, is that the McCanns withheld the E-fits for a long time.Logic tells you that this is not the response of anyone who is desperate to 'leave no stone unturned' in the search for a lost daughter.Now what on earth could be the simple motive for that decision?

The McCanns must know that this information reflects badly on them.Perhaps they gambled early on that these E-Fits would never see the light of day.
Perhaps the reason SY were unable to use them earlier was as a result of legal actions from the McCanns team of solicitors to prevent their publication?

That is not known.What is known surrounds the attempt by the McCann team to suppress the E-Fits.As I said earlier, why on earth would an innocent, desperate and transparent couple attempt to do that?

You decide.
avatar
Dr What

Posts : 249
Activity : 286
Likes received : 35
Join date : 2012-10-26

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Tony Bennett 07.08.14 20:01

worriedmum wrote:Tony said   ''So we know that Murat lied.

What is so difficult about believing that his friend Martin Smith also lied?''

Murat may or may not have lied,

His lies are admitted and documented, worriedmum, and beyond dispute!

but Martin Smith is a different person.

I know a lot of people but I would not call them my' friend ' just because I know them.

I agree with Cristobell. I  believe the Smith family sighting and the truthfulness of the Smith family.

We will therefore have to agree to differ, but can you please tell me whether you believe those two e-fits drawn up by Hanri Exton are:

1. The same person, or different persons? - and

2. Based on the Smith's recollections of what they saw?

If EITHER they are two different people, OR if they were not based on the Smiths - or worse, if BOTH apply, then DCI Andy Redwood has grossly misled the nation. 






____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by canada12 07.08.14 20:05

Sorry, but just a question here. How do we know that the two efits which were shown on Crimewatch are the same two efits which the McCanns suppressed for five years? All AR said was that they were drawn up with the help of witnesses. He did not say they were drawn up with the help of the Smith family...did he?

Is it possible these are two completely different efits?
Just throwing this out for discussion.
avatar
canada12

Posts : 1461
Activity : 1698
Likes received : 211
Join date : 2013-10-28

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Guest 07.08.14 20:11

L-azzeri's last line: "Makes one wonder, what in hell are the Portuguese Police doing?"

I'm starting to think - Nothing at all. I'm starting to think that the PJ investigation was only re-opened for the convenience of the British 'investigation'.

The McCanns will be in the clear, and there's not a damned thing anyone can do about it.

Just what monster lurks behind this mess?

And if the Portuguese are not on his side, I fear for Goncalo.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty We still DO NOT KNOW the precise provenance of the Exton e-fit images

Post by Tony Bennett 07.08.14 20:24

Dr What wrote:Whilst building a case, I was always taught to concentrate on what one knows, not on what one thinks. What we know is that the McCanns withheld the E-fits for a long time. Logic tells you that this is not the response of anyone who is desperate to 'leave no stone unturned' in the search for a lost daughter... What is known surrounds the attempt by the McCann Tteam to suppress the E-Fits...
Dr What - quite right on the general principle - but are you right in what we know?

1. We know practically for certain that Henri Exton produced those two e-fits, and almost certainly in the spring or summer of 2008, as part of his work with the disgraced Kevin Halligen, working for Brian Kennedy and the McCann Team.

2. We know that Brian Kennedy contacted the Smiths.

3. We know that Exton went to see the Smiths.

4. We do not know by any stretch of the imagination that the Smiths' recollections were the basis of those e-fits.

5. The e-fits could therefore have been produced from other people's recollections, or even from known faces.

6. Using logic, therefore, the McCanns may not have used these e-fits, at least in part, because they knew that they were not produced by the Smiths. That would go a long way to explaining why the McCanns promoted the Smith sighting ever more and more from 2009 onwards, but without using the e-fits.

7. Times Newspapers apologised to the McCanns on 28 December 2013 because these three reasons were given for not releasing the two controversial e-fits:

a) the McCanns showed them to Leics Police ('before October 2009'), and they dd not recommend publishing them

b) the McCanns showed them to the PJ ('before October 2009'), and they did not recommend publishing them either

c) the McCanns showed them to DCI Andy Redwood in August 2011, but he suppressed them for 2 years and 2 months.

8. In addition, we also know that DCI Redwood interviewed Martin Smith in 2012 and again in 2013.

9. We do not know that Martin Smith said whether these efits were drawn up by him and other members of his family or not.

10. You have written: "What we know is that the McCanns withheld the E-fits for a long time", That is not strictly true. I suggest that the following statement would be much more accurate: "We know that Henri Exton produced these 2 e-fits in 2008. They were not published until October 2013. The McCanns say that before October 2009 they showed these e-fits to Leics Police and the PJ but neither force recommended publication. Neither did DCI Redwood when he saw them in August 2011".


We are all somewhat in the dark until we know the true provenance of those two e-fits.

And we do not.

____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Tony Bennett 07.08.14 20:30

Dee Coy wrote:L-azzeri's last line: "Makes one wonder, what in hell are the Portuguese Police doing?"

I'm starting to think - Nothing at all. I'm starting to think that the PJ investigation was only re-opened for the convenience of the British 'investigation'.
@ Dee Coy.

Agreed. And I've been saying so for the past 12 months. There is simply no evidence at all that they are doing anything except going through the motions.

Once you accept this, we can then see the helicopter rides of Redwood and his stooges in the top-of-the-range Portuguese military Alouette Mark III, and all the digging for what they were - one very elaborate and expensive charade designed only to influence mass public perception in the UK - and elsewhere.

____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Google.Gaspar.Statements 07.08.14 20:48

Tony Bennett wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:L-azzeri's last line: "Makes one wonder, what in hell are the Portuguese Police doing?"

I'm starting to think - Nothing at all. I'm starting to think that the PJ investigation was only re-opened for the convenience of the British 'investigation'.
@ Dee Coy.

Agreed. And I've been saying so for the past 12 months. There is simply no evidence at all that they are doing anything except going through the motions.

Once you accept this, we can then see the helicopter rides of Redwood and his stooges in the top-of-the-range Portuguese military Alouette Mark III, and all the digging for what they were - one very elaborate and expensive charade designed only to influence mass public perception in the UK - and elsewhere.

So if the PJ are just going through the motions to help SY then they must also be happy for themselves to be portrayed as bungling sardine munchers in the British media. Why would they help the SY only to have their reputations trashed in return?

____________________
http://thegaspersstatement.blogspot.co.uk/
Google.Gaspar.Statements
Google.Gaspar.Statements

Posts : 365
Activity : 701
Likes received : 238
Join date : 2013-05-15

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by worriedmum 07.08.14 20:57

Tony said ''We are all somewhat in the dark until we know the true provenance of those two e-fits.

And we do not. ''


I totally agree with you Tony. And that's why I can't really reply to your question to me.
worriedmum
worriedmum

Posts : 2062
Activity : 2819
Likes received : 583
Join date : 2012-01-17

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Cristobell 07.08.14 21:05

Tony Bennett wrote:
Cristobell wrote:There is nothing religious in believing they are telling the truth.  Most people do, especially in a case where the life of a child is dependent on it.
Um, Cristobell.

Murat was asked by police on 15 May 2007 about his movements from Tuesday 1 May to Friday 4 May.

This, as you put it, was a case (quote) where the life of a child may have been dependent on his information.

He lied once.

He lied twice.

He lied three times.

He lied four times...

...in fact...

...he lied 17 times altogether.

So we know that Murat lied.

What is so difficult about believing that his friend Martin Smith also lied?
If our friends, or people we know lie, does that make us liars by association?

If Murat has lied, then his lies have not altered the course of the investigation.  If the Smiths are lying, they are and have been, perverting the course of justice for 7 years.  They are not telling a little white lie, they have conspired to tell a whopping great big one that has led two official police forces and umpteen private investigators off track, again, I reiterate, for 7 years!

If, as you suggest they are lying, they will be vilified as much as the 'abductor'.  Their lies would have misled the investigations, not only of the PJ, but also of Scotland Yard, so we are talking very serious crime indeed.  Their 'lies' were used as the basis for last October's Crimewatch.  Scotland Yard are clearly treating them as credible witnesses, and when this case reaches its finale, whatever that might be, DCI Redwood will be accountable for following this lead.

Nobody has given a credible reason for the Smiths to concoct such a story and continue it to this day. The connection between the Smith family and Robert Murat matters not one jot.  I still don't know what it is you think RM has done Tony? No-one absolutely no-one, would take the rap for child murder without spilling the beans on everything they know. 

I am absolutely astonished that so much has been made of a one line sentence from Gerry.  And that's because it is all we have!  We are not privy to the investigation, we don't have the information the police have, not are we likely to see it until the case is over.  We are speculating on the police files and the newspaper reports, and we have seen again and again how unreliable newspaper reports are.  Is it right to 'incriminate' this family on this forum, given the very limited amount of information we have?  The same applies to Robert Murat, we simply don't know.
avatar
Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Activity : 2552
Likes received : 6
Join date : 2011-10-12

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Varriott 07.08.14 21:06

Google.Gaspar.Statements wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:L-azzeri's last line: "Makes one wonder, what in hell are the Portuguese Police doing?"

I'm starting to think - Nothing at all. I'm starting to think that the PJ investigation was only re-opened for the convenience of the British 'investigation'.
@ Dee Coy.

Agreed. And I've been saying so for the past 12 months. There is simply no evidence at all that they are doing anything except going through the motions.

Once you accept this, we can then see the helicopter rides of Redwood and his stooges in the top-of-the-range Portuguese military Alouette Mark III, and all the digging for what they were - one very elaborate and expensive charade designed only to influence mass public perception in the UK - and elsewhere.

So if the PJ are just going through the motions to help SY then they must also be happy for themselves to be portrayed as bungling sardine munchers in the British media. Why would they help the SY only to have their reputations trashed in return?

I think it would be much more useful to think of SY and PJ, not as individuals with emotions and the ability to act rationally, but as what they actually are, which is large, bureaucratic organisations.  Bureaucracies have official procedures which need to be followed.  The only person who has taken personal action in this case is Theresa May, who ordered the investigation at SY.  After that, we have organisations acting in ways they are forced to do by the procedures set up.  I don't think any police force in the industrial, democratic world makes decisions based on whether its reputation will be trashed by foreign media.  I think all of us trying to peek behind the curtain must remember that the likes of Andy Redwood have extremely limited personal autonomy.
Varriott
Varriott

Posts : 79
Activity : 85
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2013-10-31
Location : The Big Apple

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Justformaddie 07.08.14 21:12

Would this mean the mcs advised the Leics police, the pj and AR not to publish those efits? Or the other way round? dontgetit

____________________
Parents=protection high5 
Justformaddie
Justformaddie

Posts : 540
Activity : 541
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2014-05-13
Location : On my iPad

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by ShuBob 07.08.14 21:15

worriedmum wrote:Tony said   ''So we know that Murat lied.

What is so difficult about believing that his friend Martin Smith also lied?''


Murat may or may not have lied, but Martin Smith is a different person.


I know a lot of people but I would not call them my' friend ' just because I know them.


I agree with Cristobell. I  believe the Smith family sighting and the truthfulness of the Smith family.




I'm with you two.

Until new facts emerge, it's pointless trying to convince me otherwise.
avatar
ShuBob

Posts : 1896
Activity : 1983
Likes received : 67
Join date : 2012-02-07

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Dr What 07.08.14 21:20

Tony....I do not disagree with your reply to me.

One does not actually know who drew up the E-fits.

My observation is that if two desperate and innocent parents were aware of the E-fits in the summer of '08, then it is damaging to them if the public are aware that they only made the various police forces aware of them 'before Oct.09'. A whole year later.

My argument invites people to consider, whether waiting a whole year to alert the relevant agencies to the existence of the E-fits, is a logical action of innocent and desperate parents.

Given that the McCanns ignored previous advice about the risk of publicising an eye defect to the whole world, why would the McCanns listen to any advice to suppress the E-Fits?

Dare I suggest that it benefited them to do so on this occasion?
avatar
Dr What

Posts : 249
Activity : 286
Likes received : 35
Join date : 2012-10-26

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Varriott 07.08.14 21:29

Dr What wrote:Tony....I do not disagree with your reply to me.

One does not actually know who drew up the E-fits.

My observation is that if two desperate and innocent parents were aware of the E-fits in the summer of '08, then it is damaging to them if the public are aware that they only made the various police forces aware of them 'before Oct.09'. A whole year later.

My argument invites people to consider, whether waiting a whole year to alert the relevant agencies to the existence of the E-fits, is a logical action of innocent and desperate parents.

Given that the McCanns ignored previous advice about the risk of publicising an eye defect to the whole world, why would the McCanns listen to any advice to suppress the E-Fits?

Dare I suggest that it benefited them to do so on this occasion?

I agree with Tony to the extent that the E-fits could not possibly be the Smith family's true recollections of someone they saw on May 3rd, 2007.  It is my personal view that one E-fit is pretty clearly taken from a photo of Gerry McCann and the other one from a photo of Martin Brunt.  It is my opinion that whoever made the E-fits did not make them to find a perpetrator, but as a send-up, mocking the McCanns.  I think it is possible that "two desperate and innocent parents" would have not publicized these ridiculous E-fits.  Quite simply, they are not what Andy Redwood implied that they are.  The real questions are why did Andy Redwood make them public, and why did he do so in particular last October.
Varriott
Varriott

Posts : 79
Activity : 85
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2013-10-31
Location : The Big Apple

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Tony Bennett 07.08.14 21:41

Dr What wrote:Tony....I do not disagree with your reply to me.

One does not actually know who drew up the E-fits.

My observation is that if two desperate and innocent parents were aware of the E-fits in the summer of '08, then it is damaging to them if the public are aware that they only made the various police forces aware of them 'before Oct.09'. A whole year later.

Yes, ANY delay would need to be explained. We need to look at who commissioned these e-fits, do we not?

The McCanns commissioned them.

The MCcann Team commissioned them.

The Directors of the Find Madeleine Fund commissioned them.

They employed Brian Kennedy to run their private investigation.

He hired Metodo 3.

Then he hired Oakley/Halligen.

Halligen hired Exton.

Brian Kennedy contacted the Smiths.

Exton drew up the efits.

It's in that sequence of events that we can see exactly who created these efits and why they might have done so.

ALL WE NEED TO KNOW NOW ISL

1. On what date or dates did Exton meet the Smiths?

2. Did he or did he not use the Smiths' year-old recolletions as a basis for his two e-fits - I think not.

3. If not based on the Smiths' alleged sighting, then on whom?

4. And why are they of two different men?

5. Why are they apparently done on two quite different computer porgrammes?

6.  When were they shown to the Smiths?

7. Were they altered as a result of anything the Smiths said?

8. Did the Smiths ever sign them off as being the best of their recollection?

9. Why (as you quite rightly suggest) were they not IMMEDIATELY shown to the PJ?

10. Do the Smiths now endorse those efits as the man they saw?

11. Did the Smiths, or did they not, explicitly authorise DCI Redwood to identify them on Crimwatch as the family who had drawn up the efits?     


My argument invites people to consider, whether waiting a whole year to alert the relevant agencies to the existence of the E-fits, is a logical action of innocent and desperate parents.

As indeed we should

Given that the McCanns ignored previous advice about the risk of publicising an eye defect to the whole world, why would the McCanns listen to any advice to suppress the E-Fits?

Well, that is a good point, after all, I think they've given us 23 suspects and 'persons of interest' so far, 21 men and 2 women

Dare I suggest that it benefited them to do so on this occasion?

____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Tony Bennett 07.08.14 21:46

Varriott wrote:
I agree with Tony to the extent that the E-fits could not possibly be the Smith family's true recollections of someone they saw on May 3rd, 2007.  It is my personal view that one E-fit is pretty clearly taken from a photo of Gerry McCann and the other one from a photo of Martin Brunt.  

Here we part company Varriott

It is my opinion that whoever made the E-fits did not make them to find a perpetrator, but as a send-up, mocking the McCanns.  

I will state my view that it was definitely not a case of 'mocking the McCanns', partly because I have evidence that two other people, both from the UK, probably form the basis of these two efit images 

I think it is possible that "two desperate and innocent parents" would have not publicized these ridiculous E-fits.  

Quite simply, they are not what Andy Redwood implied that they are.  

I could not agree more with that statement.

The real questions are why did Andy Redwood make them public, and why did he do so in particular last October.

____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by nglfi 08.08.14 8:46

Playing devil's advocate here, I think the e fits could be of the same person. If we imagine the process by which police or investigators go about collecting e fits, I think it would be the following - 

All witnesses who say they saw this man (the Smiths) are invited into a private room one by one, and they go through a process of picking out features, either from a range on a computer or the old fashioned way of altering a sketch made by the investigator. Each individual's interpretation of facial features can be very different.  I've often had conversations with friends or family where I have said 'doesn't person A we know look like person b?' And they completely disagree with me. I've even gone on to describe specific features that I think are similar,  and they still don't agree. I've also heard people say two other people look alike and really struggled to see what they're talking about. So individual interpretation can be very varying. I think it's possible that the two e fits are different interpretations of the same person.  To me they have common features to both of them. They are both white males with browny greying hair, in their early forties I would say, a prominent nose, similar face shape. There are other similarities which I can't quite put my finger on.  


However, and this is a big problem,  by the time the Smiths came to participate in the drawing up of the e fits (if indeed it was them), they had already seen Gerry's face flashed all over the media. Martin Smith himself saw Gerry on  tv which is how he recognised him. It doesn't make sense to my mind,  that an e git would be drawn up by the Smiths when they have already said they are reasonably sure it was Gerry. We all (unfortunately) know what Gerry looks like as we've seen his face far too often and in far too many places. The e fits are unnecessary.  I'm not saying the Smith sighting isn't genuine (as in, done for the right motives), but perhaps these e fits relate to a different sighting.
avatar
nglfi

Posts : 568
Activity : 866
Likes received : 274
Join date : 2014-01-09

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Tony Bennett 08.08.14 8:52

nglfi wrote:Playing devil's advocate here, I think the e fits could be of the same person.
Did Martin Smith do one, and Peter Smith do the other?

Or maybe Martin Smith one and Aofie Smith the other?

Or maybe Mrs Smith did one of them?

Who knows?

Did Exton try to get agreement when, obviously

* One man is older than the other

* The hairstyles are totally different

* One man has a fatter face than the other 

* One man has a rectangular face, the other more triangular?

Did the Smiths approve these two quite different-looking efits?

The more you ask these questions, the more obvious it surely becomes that the Smiths did not draw up these efits

He clearly IMO had another source for them.

____________________

Dr Martin Roberts: "The evidence is that these are the pjyamas Madeleine wore on holiday in Praia da Luz. They were photographed and the photo handed to a press agency, who released it on 8 May, as the search for Madeleine continued. The McCanns held up these same pyjamas at two press conferences on 5 & 7June 2007. How could Madeleine have been abducted?"

Amelie McCann (aged 2): "Maddie's jammies!".  

Tony Bennett
Tony Bennett
Researcher

Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Guest 08.08.14 9:04

Tony Bennett wrote:
He clearly IMO had another source for them.

The Random Face Generator?



Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by nglfi 08.08.14 9:21

Tony Bennett wrote:
nglfi wrote:Playing devil's advocate here, I think the e fits could be of the same person.
Did Martin Smith do one, and Peter Smith do the other?

Or maybe Martin Smith one and Aofie Smith the other?

Or maybe Mrs Smith did one of them?

Who knows?

Did Exton try to get agreement when, obviously

* One man is older than the other

* The hairstyles are totally different

* One man has a fatter face than the other 

* One man has a rectangular face, the other more triangular?

Did the Smiths approve these two quite different-looking efits?

The more you ask these questions, the more obvious it surely becomes that the Smiths did not draw up these efits

He clearly IMO had another source for them.
I agree, as I said I'm no longer sure that these e fits relate to the Smith sighting. As I said above they seem completely unnecessary,  as Martin Smith said he recognised Gerry McCann. There is no need for an e fit. We know what he looks like. But I do think they could be of the same person,  perhaps drawn up on the basis of two witnesses unknown to each other. Not only are people's interpretation's varying, but also memories deteriorate at different rates and eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. Imo there are still enough similarities between the two faces that they could be twp different people's memory of the same person.
avatar
nglfi

Posts : 568
Activity : 866
Likes received : 274
Join date : 2014-01-09

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by aiyoyo 08.08.14 9:24

Can't recall what was said at CW.

Was it mentioned that the two efits were of one man?
That they were the abductors?
Was it mentioned they were the guys Smith family saw?

What exactly were the info given for the appeal?

aiyoyo
aiyoyo

Posts : 9610
Activity : 10084
Likes received : 326
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Liz Eagles 08.08.14 9:44

Here's the link for CrimeWatch October 2014

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCewUVxDi9Y
Liz Eagles
Liz Eagles

Posts : 10944
Activity : 13351
Likes received : 2216
Join date : 2011-09-03

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Cristobell 08.08.14 12:15

ShuBob wrote:
worriedmum wrote:Tony said   ''So we know that Murat lied.

What is so difficult about believing that his friend Martin Smith also lied?''


Murat may or may not have lied, but Martin Smith is a different person.


I know a lot of people but I would not call them my' friend ' just because I know them.


I agree with Cristobell. I  believe the Smith family sighting and the truthfulness of the Smith family.




I'm with you two.

Until new facts emerge, it's pointless trying to convince me otherwise
Sometimes a spoon is just a spoon.
avatar
Cristobell

Posts : 2436
Activity : 2552
Likes received : 6
Join date : 2011-10-12

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Jamming 08.08.14 12:17

Tony Bennett wrote:
Varriott wrote:
I agree with Tony to the extent that the E-fits could not possibly be the Smith family's true recollections of someone they saw on May 3rd, 2007.  It is my personal view that one E-fit is pretty clearly taken from a photo of Gerry McCann and the other one from a photo of Martin Brunt.  

Here we part company Varriott

It is my opinion that whoever made the E-fits did not make them to find a perpetrator, but as a send-up, mocking the McCanns.  

I will state my view that it was definitely not a case of 'mocking the McCanns', partly because I have evidence that two other people, both from the UK, probably form the basis of these two efit images 

I think it is possible that "two desperate and innocent parents" would have not publicized these ridiculous E-fits.  

Quite simply, they are not what Andy Redwood implied that they are.  

I could not agree more with that statement.

The real questions are why did Andy Redwood make them public, and why did he do so in particular last October.

Tony, apologies if you have discussed the part in red above previously, but can you expand on that at all, i.e. who? If it is an area you cannot go into for obvious reasons on here I fully understand
Jamming
Jamming

Posts : 134
Activity : 133
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2014-06-04

Back to top Go down

Possible Action Against The Times - Page 11 Empty Re: Possible Action Against The Times

Post by Justformaddie 08.08.14 12:33

ShuBob wrote:
worriedmum wrote:Tony said   ''So we know that Murat lied.

What is so difficult about believing that his friend Martin Smith also lied?''


Murat may or may not have lied, but Martin Smith is a different person.


I know a lot of people but I would not call them my' friend ' just because I know them.


I agree with Cristobell. I  believe the Smith family sighting and the truthfulness of the Smith family.




I'm with you two.

Until new facts emerge, it's pointless trying to convince me otherwise.
Been thinking about this, if Martin fabricated smithman, to help Murat which is horrible on its own, but not impossible, they must at least, be on speaking terms to communicate. Like, hi mate thanks. Anyway, if Murat was called to help the mcs, then Murat probably knew or knew off the mcs. I'm confused too but, why then in sept07 would Martin tell police he's 60 to 80% sure it was gm? If Martin made it up, could he be that heartless to say he's that percent sure it was the father of the child? Would Murat not have let him know it was a favour for a friend of a friend, describe tannerman but nothing else? I understand Martin helping out Murat if he did, but I don't understand martins statement about gm.
No facts all IMO

____________________
Parents=protection high5 
Justformaddie
Justformaddie

Posts : 540
Activity : 541
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2014-05-13
Location : On my iPad

Back to top Go down

Page 11 of 16 Previous  1 ... 7 ... 10, 11, 12 ... 16  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum