SMITHMAN 4: A summary of discrepancies in what the Smiths say about their 'sighting'

Hongkong Phooey wrote:

SixMillionQuid wrote:

Hongkong Phooey wrote:

Gollum wrote:
I have to remain open minded as to whether or not they saw anything at all.  As I've said before (and no doubt others also have said), why would someone who has committed a serious crime or their accomplice carry a body around the streets at the risk of being seen?  Chances of being seen around 10:00 pm I imagine to be 50-80% likely.  Who would be that stupid even in a state of desperation or panic?

To suggest it was a planned alibi of some sorts doesn't make any sense to me, I can't see what it would achieve.

Or why would someone and his family risk going to jail for fabricating a sighting or making up evidence or perverting the course of justice in an internationally recognised missing child case? That doesn't make any sense either.

As far as they're concerned they saw what they saw and someone would have to come out prove they couldn't have seen what they saw. Maybe CCTV could have put and end to that speculation - there was a CCTV camera along the route Smithman took. But Jane Tanner saw what she saw and six years later she didn't quite see what she thought she saw but she's riding into the sunset right now totally exonerated.

None of the Smiths will be going to jail ever for making their statements, so dont worry about lies or perjury. At 10pm Smithman was walking towards a junction with a child in his arms. Did he go forward towards Kelly's Bar and risk getting spotted, left towards the east, or right towards the west. At the same time the T8(?) were making their way towards 5A as the alarm was raised and if this was a simulated abduction one of the twins is not in their cot and GM is walking around PdL with a kid in his arms. So what time did he get back to 5A with one of the twins?

Do you work for the prosecution services? How can you categorically state none are going to jail you could probably only state that if you knew they had told the truth. Your also missing the point, it's ok to sit seven years later and state this and that, at the time the Smiths if they were to fabricate or misrepresent a situation had a decision to make, they didn't know at that point in time all the lies and half truths that would appear throughout. The consequences of their actions would no doubt have been considered however imo they are telling the truth.

palm tree wrote:Ohh, do you think it was a decoy?

SixMillionQuid wrote:
The only way they would go to jail is if somebody started talking about what really went on or if there was evidence to disprove what they claim they saw eg. CCTV. Other than that we can only go by what they have said...which is what I am doing. So if they're telling the truth I am trying to work out the route GM took to get back to 5A, with a child in his arms and not get spotted again.

sami wrote:@palm tree and tony bennett

Yes, thank you, my post was badly worded.  He did wait 11 days, what I was trying to say was the tv footage had an immediate impact on him, not being able to sleep, what he saw hit home straight away.  He does not describe the on street experience as ever having the same effect, yet he was there in PDL whilst the  searches were launched.

palm tree wrote:I read on the mccannfiles that GA said the waitresses and cooks from the tapas saw people leaving and returning to the table, but also said that they couldn't be sure  who went where and at what time? There's also JT mentioning KM complaining that GM was gone longer, and had joked about him watching the football. RO had also said that all shutters were down including the sliding door shutters, and someone would have to lift them to get in, this is from Dr Roberts titled Shutter Island. Sorry for absent links as I don't know  I'm also confused as the exact time for the alert, shortly after 9, 10 or Mrs Fenns 10:30? 
IMO

palm tree wrote:Martin Smith actually waited 11 days after seeing gm come off the plane, clearly shaken and unable to sleep, IMO 11 days of should I, wont I? But he did, even though he might be implicating the child's own father. That takes a lot IMO. If I'd heard a child had been abducted, I certainly wouldn't jump to the conclusion that I'd past the abductor with the child in those circumstances. I would've expected someone with a screaming child, speeding off in a car, not a man carrying a child in a deep sleep walking down the road. 
IMO

Gollum wrote:

I would sincerely hope that if Martin Smith did report his concerns reasonably promptly, having seen Gerry leaving the aircraft,  Liam Hogan would have given the matter priority, not sat on it for days on end. If he didn't then the question remains, as it does in regard to his initial reaction on 3rd/4th May.

Get 'em Gonçalo wrote:26 JANUARY 2011 | POSTED BY [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

From: DC 1756 Mike Marshall

Dept.: Leicestershire Police, Phone nr. 0116 2484409

To: Ricardo Paiva

Ref.: David Payne

Date: October 24, 2007



Ricardo,


Please find enclosed [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] statements, as requested.


I have carefully read the written questionnaire that was handed over by David Payne, but I was unable to extract any other information apart from what is already known.

He states that he saw Madeleine, for the last time, at 5 pm on the 3rd of May, 2007, in the McCanns’ apartment. Kate and Gerry were equally present then. He did not state the reason why he was in the apartment at that time, or what they were doing. He does not state for how long he stayed there, either.

When he was asked with who he was in the evening of the 3rd of May, he states that he has already given that information to the police and that he cannot remember if he was aware of anyone else.

He cannot recall what he was wearing that afternoon.

In fact, he participated in the search, but for most of the time, he was alone. Sometimes he was accompanied by Matthew Oldfield.

He did not participate in the searches that took place on the 4th of May, because he spent most of that day at the police station.

To many of the questions there is no full reply, stating merely and he has already supplied the Portuguese police with the information / statements.


I have again examined Fiona Payne’s information. In her statement, she says that she went to the McCanns’ apartment at around 7 pm on the 3rd of May, along with Kate. She states that the husband arrived 10 minutes later; it is unclear what husband she is referring to, whether it’s Gerry or her own husband.

Her replies to the written questionnaire are vague, as she replies to the questions saying “according to my statement” or using a similar expression.



in: Processo 201/07.0 GALGS, pages 3909 and 3910 (Volume XIII)
-------
Related: The Gaspar Statements [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The statement of Dr Katherine Zacharias Gaspar made to Leicestershire Police on 16 May 2007:

“I give this declaration in relation to the McCANN family who are currently in Portugal. The McCANN family is composed of Gerry McCANN, his wife, Kate McCANN and their three children, Madeleine, aged 4, and Sean and Amelie, who are twins and 3 years of age. As is abundantly clear, Madeleine is not with her family presently, and has been missing for the last two weeks.

“I will start by explaining that I am married to Arul Savio Gaspar and we have two daughters. I have been married to Savio for 11 years. We met when we were working together in Exeter about 14 years ago [1993]. I am a General Practitioner as was my husband. He continues to be a General Practitioner but is also a specialist.

“To explain how we know the McCann family, I would say that my husband knows Kate, as they both attended the University of Dundee between 1987 and 1992. At the time, Kate was known by the name of Kate Healey. I met Kate and Gerry on the occasion of their wedding around 1998 in Liverpool. Both Savio and I went to the wedding because Savio was an old friend of Kate; we were both invited to the event. From what I know, Savio did not know Gerry McCann before they married. From that time on, we met as friends, probably about three times a year and we would spend the weekend together.

“I would say we got to be close friends of Gerry and Kate. I remember that in 2002 or 2003, Savio and I spent a weekend with Gerry and Kate in Devon. We maintained contact with each other by ’phone. In 2002 or 2003 Savio and I were living in the Birmingham area and the McCanns were then in Leicester. In September 2005 Savio, me and ‘A’ [name of first child] (who was around one year and a half) holidayed in Majorca, with Kate, Gerry, Madeleine (who was about 2½ years old) and the twins, Sean and Amelie, who were only a few months old. I was pregnant with ‘B’ [name of second child]. There were also other friends of Kate and Gerry with us there. There was a couple, Dave and Fiona (the Paynes, I think). I believe they were married and had a daughter around one year old called Lily. I remember Fiona was pregnant on that holiday.

“There was another couple on the vacation: C_____ and D_____, whose surname I can’t remember. They had two boys (three years and one year old respectively) whose names I don’t remember. I did not know either of these two families before this holiday. I think it was Dave Payne who organised the trip and we stayed in a big house in Majorca. We were there for one week whilst the McCanns and the Paynes stayed for two weeks. I believe C_____ and D_____ and their two sons also stayed for one week.

“It was fun during the first two or three days. Probably around the fourth or fifth day there was an incident that stuck in my mind. I say this because I have thought about the particular incident I am about to describe many times since then.

“One night, when all the adults, that is, from those couples I have mentioned above, were all sitting around on a patio outside the house where we were all staying. We had been eating and drinking ‘Berbers’.
I was sitting between Gerry and Dave and I think both were talking about Madeleine. I can’t remember the conversation in its entirety, but they seemed to be discussing a particular scenario. I remember Dave saying to Gerry something about ‘she’, meaning Madeleine, ‘would do this’.

“While he mentioned the word ‘this’, Dave was doing the action of sucking one of his fingers, pushing it in and out of his mouth, while with his other hand he was doing a circle around his nipple, with a circular movement around his clothes. This was done in a provocative way. There seemed to be an explicit insinuation about what he was saying and doing. I remember being shocked by that. I always felt it was something very weird and that it was not something anyone should say or do. I looked at Gerry, and also at Dave, to gauge their reactions.

“I looked around as if saying: “Did someone else hear that, or was it just me?”. The conversations stopped for a moment, then we all began conversing again. Moreover, I remember Dave doing the same thing on another occasion. In saying this, I want to mention once again that it was during a conversation in which he was talking about an imaginary scenario, although I’m not sure. He again stuck one of his fingers in and out of his mouth and with the other hand he once again drew a circle around his nipple in a provocative and sexual way. I think he was referring to the way she, that is, his daughter Lily, would behave or what she would do. I think he did this later during this same holiday, but I’m not sure.

“The only time since then that I have been in the company of Dave and Fiona was several weeks after the holidays, when Savio and I met Gerry, Kate, Dave and Fiona in a restaurant in Leicester. I’m sure that he said what he said and made the gestures I have related, but [the second time] it could have happened in the restaurant in Leicester, although I do think it was in Majorca that I heard Dave say and do this for the second time. After the second occasion [when he made these gestures] I took it more seriously.

“I remember thinking whether he would look at my daughter and other little girls in a different way than I or others do. I imagined that he had perhaps visited internet sites related to little children. In a word, I thought that he could be interested in child pornography on the web. During our holiday in Majorca, each parent would bath the children in turn. I was keen to stay near the bathroom if Dave was bathing the children. I remember I said to Savio to be careful and to be close by if Dave was helping to bathe the children and my daughter in particular. I did this [stay hear the bathroom if Dave was bathing the children] quite obviously because hearing what he said had troubled me and I didn’t trust him bathing ‘A’ [our first child].

“When I heard Dave say this for the second time, it reinforced what I had already been thinking concerning his thoughts about little girls. During our stay in Majorca, Dave and his wife Fiona and their daughter Lily used to take Madeleine with them for the day in order that Kate and Gerry could rest a bit and had time just for the twins. I wasn’t worried about Madeleine’s safety, because Fiona and [another female adult] were there, as well as Dave. As already referred to, I was only with Dave and Fiona on one occasion, after [we were on holiday together in] Majorca. And I have not spoken to them at all since that time. In recent, we have seen the McCann family on occasions. These occasions coincide with the children’s birthdays – a time when we all get together.

“The first time I heard the terrible news regarding the disappearance of Madeleine McCann on the radio, my thoughts raced immediately to Dave. I asked Savio if Dave was also on holiday with the McCanns in Portugal, but he didn’t know. I watched TV to catch the coverage of the news and eventually discovered that Dave was there with the McCanns.

“Then I saw him on TV a few days after Madeleine disappeared. I therefore believed that he was on holiday with the McCanns in Portugal. Today, Wednesday 16 May, 2007, at 3.40pm, I have given Detective Constable Brewer a page containing 2 photographic images. I am going to reference these images as: Ref KZG/1). I consent that these may be exhibited as required [by the police]. All these photographs were taken during our holidays in Majorca. In the photographs, Dave is wearing a white T-shirt and the woman in the photograph is his wife Fiona. The man that is holding the cup of wine in the photograph is _____”.

That statement of Dr Katherine Gaspar alone is very concerning. I now turn to a statement made by Dr Katherine Gaspar’s husband, Dr Arul Savio Gaspar, also made on the same day:

“I make this statement in relation to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. I currently work as a General Practitioner at St Clements Surgery, Birmingham, where I have been employed for the last nine years. Madeleine is the daughter of Kate and Gerry McCann and we are friends of the family. I have known Kate since 1987, when we met at Dundee Medical School, and became friends. We have remained in touch all this time and meet up three or four times a year. We often talk on the ’phone or email each other. When we first became friends in 1987, she was still known as Kate Healy; this remained so until she married Gerry at the end of 1990s.

“Kate and I completed our medical degrees in 1992, when we each carried on with our lives, once we had begun our careers. After I finished my degree, I began my career in Exeter, and I think Kate went to Glasgow. I only met up with Kate again in 1997 or 1998. At that moment I was married to Katherine. We had both been invited to attend Kate and Gerry’s wedding.

“After their wedding we lost contact and I think they went to New Zealand. We only met up again in 2001 in Birmingham. The couple visited us in the house where we then living, in ______, and this was the first time I had ever talked to Gerry. I think that at that time Kate and Gerry were living in Queniborough, Leicestershire. From 2001 until 2005, we were in regular contact with each other and often visited each other’s homes.

“We planned a holiday together for the first week of September 2005 in Majorca, together with three other couples including Kate and Gerry. We did not know the other two couples; they were both friends of Kate and Gerry’s. We had never met them before. All of us had children. When we went on this holiday we had one daughter, ‘A’, aged 18 months. Kate and Gerry had three children, Madeleine – almost two – and the twins, who were six months old [NOTE: Madeleine was 2¼ in September 2005].

The other couples were Fiona and David Payne and their daughter Lily who was one year old and ______ and ______ who had two boys aged three and one. I do not remember the surname of ______ and ______ nor the names of their children. Katherine and I had booked the holiday for one week and the McCanns and the other two couples had booked for two weeks. We stayed together in a large villa. We all arrived at the villa separately.

“During the period we stayed at the villa I remember a gesture made by David Payne. I do not remember the context of the conversation between David and Gerry, but I do remember seeing David use his left index finger to rub his nipple, using circular movements, whilst he put his right index finger into his mouth, touching his tongue. This happened during a meal, at the end of the day, in the villa. I do not remember the time or the date, but we would usually dine between 7.30pm and 9.00pm every day. I think this happened in the middle of the holiday.

“I remember that when I saw this gesture, I immediately thought it to be in very bad taste, independently of the context of the conversation they were having. We were sitting around a white plastic table in the villa. I don’t know if anyone else saw the gesture, apart from my wife Katherine. After this gesture, we did not notice any others and as far as I know, the gesture was not repeated. We never commented on this gesture during the rest of the holiday and I thought no more about it.

“I can describe Dave as a Caucasian male 5’ 10” tall, and of a medium complexion. He had brown hair and used glasses or contact lenses depending on the circumstances. I can say that Dave was a pleasant person. I do not remember him having any unusual characteristics.

During the holidays Dave never behaved in an inappropriate manner with Madeleine or with any of the other children. Dave was popular with the children and I took this to be because he was a close friend to the family.

“I never distrusted Dave. After the holidays there was one occasion when we were with Kate and Gerry and Fiona and Dave were also present. That was in a restaurant in Leicester in 2005. I do not remember the name of the restaurant. We had a pleasant evening, just the three couples without the children. I do not remember Dave having behaved inappropriately on this occasion. We have not spoken to Dave or Fiona since December 2005, only due to their being friends of Kate and Gerry [rather than ourselves], not for any other reason. The last time I saw Kate, Gerry, Madeleine, Sean and Amelie was in March 2007 when they came to our house for the first birthday celebration of my daughter ‘B’.

“On the morning of 4th May [2007], Katherine saw the news about Madeleine on television. We were very shocked and worried given that they were close friends. It was during the days following the news of the abduction that we discovered that Fiona and David Payne were also with them in Portugal. It was at this moment that Katherine showed concern at the gesture made by Dave in Majorca in 2005. Katherine remembered that when Dave made the gesture, he was referring to Madeleine.

I only remember that Katherine saw the gesture at the time; I had forgotten the episode, it was never the subject of conversation. At the time I did not feel the gesture was referring to Madeleine.
It is my wish that the police are aware of my preoccupation with the gesture made by David Payne”.

Dee Coy wrote:
How would you explain this delay? If they did it here there is no reason to assume they wouldn't keep back other information they consider may reflect badly on the group, in my opinion. Would you agree?

Dee Coy wrote:Of course.

'This delay' being the time between Mrs Gaspar making her statement on May 16 and the date at which it was sent to the Portuguese - at their request - on 24 October.

'it' being the act of failing to forward information promptly to the Portuguese, as was the case here with the Gaspar statement.

Gollum wrote:Honkong Phooey today @ 8:12 am

I would sincerely hope that if Martin Smith did report his concerns reasonably promptly, having seen Gerry leaving the aircraft,  Liam Hogan would have given the matter priority, not sat on it for days on end. If he didn't then the question remains, as it does in regard to his initial reaction on 3rd/4th May.

You say "it does appear that for example Mrs Smith's statement has been held back", are you not guilty of doing exactly what you repeatedly accuse others of doing i.e. making things up or surmising or guessing? All you have to go on is a report that Mrs Smith 'didn't want to give another statement', from that you are assuming that she had already given a statement, irrespective of the fact that there is no official record of such. Yes, the family may be telling the truth, conversely they may not be telling the truth. As far as I see it, there are too many holes that can't be explained.

Admit that you are none the wiser than the rest, so I ask that you please allow other members to express their opinions without jumping on every post with vapid words with no substance.

Tony Bennett wrote:

Dee Coy wrote:Of course.

'This delay' being the time between Mrs Gaspar making her statement on May 16 and the date at which it was sent to the Portuguese - at their request - on 24 October.

'it' being the act of failing to forward information promptly to the Portuguese, as was the case here with the Gaspar statement.

Thank you.

I recall that a request for information from Leics POlice about why there was a 5-month delay in forwarding the Gaspar statements to Portugal was firmly met by LP, without batting an eyelid, so to speak, with:

"There was no delay in forwarding anything to the PJ" - or something like that

sami wrote:As regards Mrs Smith.   I don't recall seeing her name included in the list of missing documents/statements from the DVD, but perhaps somebody else here does ?

Other than the inclusion of the word "another" by a Garda in his cover letter, so far I don't see definite confirmation she ever made a statement.  The Guard may have made an assumption there was already a first statement from her.  Not unreasonable, given three others in her company on the night in question had done so.

Hongkong Phooey wrote:

IMO both the Gaspers and the Smiths can be relied upon to have given truthful statements. Can we question and try to discredit them yes but both pretty much stand up.

Hongkong Phooey wrote:

Tony Bennett wrote:

Dee Coy wrote:Of course.

'This delay' being the time between Mrs Gaspar making her statement on May 16 and the date at which it was sent to the Portuguese - at their request - on 24 October.

'it' being the act of failing to forward information promptly to the Portuguese, as was the case here with the Gaspar statement.

Thank you.

I recall that a request for information from Leics POlice about why there was a 5-month delay in forwarding the Gaspar statements to Portugal was firmly met by LP, without batting an eyelid, so to speak, with:

"There was no delay in forwarding anything to the PJ" - or something like that

IMO both the Gaspers and the Smiths can be relied upon to have given truthful statements. Can we question and try to discredit them yes but both pretty much stand up. Funnily enough these two are the areas which the McCanns shy away from (they have given some acknowledgement to Smithman but none to the Gaspers iirc)

Tony Bennett wrote:

Hongkong Phooey wrote:

IMO both the Gaspers and the Smiths can be relied upon to have given truthful statements. Can we question and try to discredit them yes but both pretty much stand up.

There is every reason to take the Gaspar [sp.] statements at face value.

The very moment they saw that Payne was down in Praia da Luz with the McCanns, they were on the blower to Leicestershire Police.

And the statements each of the Drs Gaspar gave to the police were consistent with each other, albeit with some differences of interpretation of what they saw.  


Contrast that with the Smiths:

THIRTEEN-DAY DELAY in reporting their alleged sighting of 'Smithman'

ELEVEN-DAY DELAY in Martin Smith reporting his claim that the man he'd seen in the dark 4 months earlier was really Gerry McCann

RIDICULOUS REASON for thinking it was Gerry McCann ' the way he was carrying his child'  

NUMEROUS CONTRADICTIONS as fully set out in the OP (to which members here have added two more: (a) Martin Smith couldn't see what 'top' the man was wearing, then 9 months later 'remembered' what it was and its colour and (b) Aoife Smith said child's face was pressed against the man's chest yet Peter Smith claimed he could see that her eyelids were closed (!).)

PLUS we also have Martin Smith's clearly exaggerated claims about (a) his former career and (b) the Directors of his company, Golf Net Ltd. 
  

You still 'rely' on Martin Smith and his son and daughters to 'make truthful statements' after all that?

Why?

Tony Bennett wrote:

Hongkong Phooey wrote:

IMO both the Gaspers and the Smiths can be relied upon to have given truthful statements. Can we question and try to discredit them yes but both pretty much stand up.

There is every reason to take the Gaspar [sp.] statements at face value.

The very moment they saw that Payne was down in Praia da Luz with the McCanns, they were on the blower to Leicestershire Police.

And the statements each of the Drs Gaspar gave to the police were consistent with each other, albeit with some differences of interpretation of what they saw.  


Contrast that with the Smiths:

THIRTEEN-DAY DELAY in reporting their alleged sighting of 'Smithman'

ELEVEN-DAY DELAY in Martin Smith reporting his claim that the man he'd seen in the dark 4 months earlier was really Gerry McCann

RIDICULOUS REASON for thinking it was Gerry McCann ' the way he was carrying his child'  

NUMEROUS CONTRADICTIONS as fully set out in the OP (to which members here have added two more: (a) Martin Smith couldn't see what 'top' the man was wearing, then 9 months later 'remembered' what it was and its colour and (b) Aoife Smith said child's face was pressed against the man's chest yet Peter Smith claimed he could see that her eyelids were closed (!).)

PLUS we also have Martin Smith's clearly exaggerated claims about (a) his former career and (b) the Directors of his company, Golf Net Ltd. 
  

You still 'rely' on Martin Smith and his son and daughters to 'make truthful statements' after all that?

Why?

Dee Coy wrote:

When did Martin Smith give his statement to Leic police between 9 and 20 September? We know it was sent on 20th  
September, but when was it taken?

Hongkong Phooey wrote:

A lot of your discrepancies are quotes from newspapers

REPLY: Wrong and deliberately misleading. The contradictions stem from a combination of what they say in their three statements and what comes from their own mouths in direct quotes from oral staemens they have voluntarily given to the press.
    
and are 'chip paper' quotes.

REPLY: A cheap comment.

The others have been answered by suggestion because that is all that both sides of the argument have.

REPLY: Absolute twaddle. The OP is packed with undeniable facts clearly documenting the many contradictions.
   
I don't know exactly why there was delays etc. only the Smiths can answer that,  

REPLY: Actually, Hongkong Phooey, as you know very well, they HAVE answered that, and answered it many times. The problem they have is that every time, they give a different - and contradictory - excuse for their delay. Please refresh your memory by looking again at the very first section of the OP.

however I'm not willing to cast doubt on their honesty given what little evidence we know of. Others on this thread have opposing views, I've seen nothing in these views (mostly assumptions and guesswork) that's convincing.

REPLY: That could well be IMO because you do not want to confront and explain the many puzzles and contradicitions exposed in the Smiths' evidence. Your position can I think be summed up thus: "I believe the Smiths are honest, reliable witnesses, and no matter how much evidence anyone produces to the contrary, my mind is made up".  

The differences in 'open or shut eyes' etc. has been explained elsewhere on this thread. The Smiths family were spread out so saw Smithmsn at slightly different angles etc. It would have been more suspicious if the all reported the exact same thing I.e. Aoife was only 2 meters away and looking up (as she claims).

Can't say im interested in MS  golf business, imo its a red herring.

Tony Bennett wrote:

Dee Coy wrote:

When did Martin Smith give his statement to Leic police between 9 and 20 September? We know it was sent on 20th  
September, but when was it taken?

We do not know.

And in the absence of certain knowledge, we have to trust our judgment.

Which is more likley?

A. That Smith for reasons best known to himself left it for 11 days, or

B. That Detective Liam Hogan left Martin Smith's signed statement in his in-tray for a whole 11 days before faxing it to Portugal.

Tony Bennett wrote:

Hongkong Phooey wrote:

A lot of your discrepancies are quotes from newspapers

REPLY: Wrong and deliberately misleading. The contradictions stem from a combination of what they say in their three statements and what comes from their own mouths in direct quotes from oral staemens they have voluntarily given to the press.
    
and are 'chip paper' quotes.

REPLY: A cheap comment.

The others have been answered by suggestion because that is all that both sides of the argument have.

REPLY: Absolute twaddle. The OP is packed with undeniable facts clearly documenting the many contradictions.
   
I don't know exactly why there was delays etc. only the Smiths can answer that,  

REPLY: Actually, Hongkong Phooey, as you know very well, they HAVE answered that, and answered it many times. The problem they have is that every time, they give a different - and contradictory - excuse for their delay. Please refresh your memory by looking again at the very first section of the OP.

however I'm not willing to cast doubt on their honesty given what little evidence we know of. Others on this thread have opposing views, I've seen nothing in these views (mostly assumptions and guesswork) that's convincing.

REPLY: That could well be IMO because you do not want to confront and explain the many puzzles and contradicitions exposed in the Smiths' evidence. Your position can I think be summed up thus: "I believe the Smiths are honest, reliable witnesses, and no matter how much evidence anyone produces to the contrary, my mind is made up".  

The differences in 'open or shut eyes' etc. has been explained elsewhere on this thread. The Smiths family were spread out so saw Smithmsn at slightly different angles etc. It would have been more suspicious if the all reported the exact same thing I.e. Aoife was only 2 meters away and looking up (as she claims).

Can't say im interested in MS  golf business, imo its a red herring.