SMITHMAN 11 An answer to Carla Spade about evidence that Martin Smith collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008
Page 1 of 1 • Share
Is there evidence that Martin Smith has collaborated with the McCann Team over his alleged sighting?
SMITHMAN 11 An answer to Carla Spade about evidence that Martin Smith collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008
by Tony Bennett 13.06.17 23:39
SMITHMAN 11
"An answer to Carla Spade about evidence that Martin Smith collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008"
I have decided to open one further ‘Smithman’ thread and I promise that this will be my very last.
The reason for doing so is that I have been repeatedly attacked by @CarlaSpade on Twitter for allegedly having ‘no evidence’ in support of my contention that Martin Smith has actively collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008. I also say that Martin Smith has actively collaborated with Operation Grange since 2012 i.e. for the past 5 years.
These are the two tweets I am specifically responding to:
Carla Spade @CarlaSpade 07 Jun 2017
You've made several claims @zampos but you haven't been able to provide evidence for any of them. Provide it or you're a fraud [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Carla Spade @CarlaSpade 08 Jun 2017
I'm still waiting @zampos for you to provide evidence to back up these nonsense claims. You can't though can you? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
There was also this today from Ben Thompson:
Bugsy @TheBunnyReturns
The only reason I can think of that Bennett is allowed to continue [to discuss Madeleine’s disappearance], is that he discredits firm evidence that implicates Kate and Gerry [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
This, again, is a reference to the ‘Smithman’ sighting. Thompson has long taken the view that the Smithman sighting is the firmest evidence we have that Gerry McCann hid Madeleine’s body, so much so that he has maintained for two years that I am acting in cahoots with the McCanns to dismiss the ‘truth’ of this claimed sighting. He also calls me a government ‘shill’
@CarlaSpade is one of a number of followers of the Madeleine McCann case who insists that when Martin Smith - on 20 September 2007, 140 days after 3 May 2007 - told police he was ‘60% to 80% sure’ that it was Gerry McCann he had seen carrying a child that night, this is somehow absolute proof that he did in fact see Gerry McCann that night carrying his dead daughter through the streets of Praia da Luz.
All the reasons why I reject that claim are on the Smithman threads and are well known on the forum and I won’t repeat them again here.
My analysis of the claimed ‘Smithman’ sighting has, it is true, been rejected by many.
I have been accused of not believing a ‘respectable, honest, decent’ man and family, and of effectively accusing them of lying. Those who make that accusation generally think there are insufficient grounds for questioning the evidence and statements of people like Martin, Peter and Aoife Smith, Pamela Fenn and Robert Murat, despite obvious problems with all of their statements.
Along with that have been miscellaneous claims that I have been 'obsessed with Smithman', have 'banned people who disagree with me on Smithman', and 'bent on proving he is right'.
But ever since, two weeks after the BBC Crimewatch McCann Show on 14 October 2013, I began to question the truth of the ‘Smithman’ sighting, another more serious accusation has been leveled at me by people who post elsewhere and on Twitter. They say I am ‘a pro-McCann in disguise’. They accuse me of ‘destroying the best evidence there is that Gerry McCann hid his daughter’s body’. They insinuate that I have done a ‘dirty deal’ with the McCanns.
After I was found guilty of contempt of the High Court in February 2013, I did do a deal with the McCanns. I agreed to cancel my appeal to the Court of Appeal against the High Court ruling, and at the same time agreed to cancel my application to be freed from the various undertakings I was forced to give to the McCanns back in November 2009. In return, they agreed to substantially reduce what was an enormous costs bill against me, which they estimated at over £300,000. They had employed two barristers against me to make sure I was defeated. That is what the deal was about. The McCanns gained the benefit of my withdrawing an appeal and an application. I gained a substantial reduction in my costs bill. It is as simple as that.
But some insist loudly on Twitter and elsewhere that it was a ‘grubby deal’ to attack the Smith sighting on the McCanns’ behalf (!). Some go further and allege that I am a paid government ‘shill’. These accusations are made repeatedly on the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] hashtag on Twitter and on forums which purport to campaign for the truth about what really happened to Madeleine McCann.
I would not normally reply to someone like @CarlaSpade, whose attacks have been relentless, aggressive, and laced with bad language.
Nevertheless it gives me one final opportunity to explain how Martin Smith clearly worked for and collaborated with the McCanns from January 2008 onwards.
I will answer @CarlaSpade by reproducing the OP of ‘SMITHMAN8’ (The Nine Phases of Smithman) and in bold are my questions, which she and anyone else who still believes that Martin Smith hasn’t been working for the McCann Team must answer:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
THE NINE PHASES OF SMITHMAN
Phase 1
from 3 to 15 May 2007:
AN UNREPORTED SIGHTING
The Smiths claim to have seen a man carrying a child at about 10.00pm on 3 May, but do not report it – a baffling delay. They give several contradictory reasons for not reporting what they say they saw
Phase 2
from 16 May to 20 September 2007:
A REPORTED SIGHTING
On 16 May The Smiths get round to reporting what they say they saw – the day after someone they know, Robert Murat, is made an unofficial suspect in the case. The Portuguese Police interview three members of the Smith family on 26 May. Martin Smith is adamant that the man he saw was not Robert Murat. All the three Smiths admit they saw the man in the dark and for a few seconds at the most, and agree that none of them would be ablse to recognise him again if they saw him
Phase 3
from 20 September to December 2007:
COULD IT BE GERRY MCCANN?
Martin Smith triggers new interest in the sighting by claiming that he was 60% to 80% sure that he really saw Gerry McCann that night in early May. He bases this on the way Gerry McCann carried his son Sean down the steps of an aeroplane on 9 September. He delays reporting his new belief for 11 days
Phase 4
from January 2008 to December 2008:
THE MCCANNS TAKE OVER THE SMITH SIGHTING
Newspaper articles on 3 and 4 January 2008 reveal that Metodo 3 have ‘already’ been in touch with the Smiths - and that Cheshire businessman Brian Kennedy, one of the McCann Team, is also involved. The Sun reported that “Investigators from the Metodo 3 agency hired by Maddie's parents Gerry and Kate are preparing to travel to Ireland to interview them”. Kennedy contacts the Smiths. Henri Exton, and possibly Irishman Kevin Halligen, visits the Smiths and produces two e-fits of what, to many people, looks like two different men: different face shape and size, differences in chin and nose length, hair style and so on. From this moment on, Martin Smith drops his identification of the man he says he saw as Gerry McCann, supports the McCanns’ search for the abductor, and in effect becomes a McCann supporter, working with the McCann Team
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith know that Metodo 3 and Brian Kennedy were working for the McCanns? [CLUE: QUOTE > The Sun reported that “Investigators from the Metodo 3 agency hired by Maddie's parents Gerry and Kate are preparing to travel to Ireland to interview them”.]
QUESTION: If Martin Smith was sure he’d seen Gerry McCann on 3 May 2007, why would he even agree to speak to people from Metodo 3 and to Brian Kennedy?
QUESTION: Why did Martin Smith (and/or other members of the Smith family) agree to draw up e-fits with Henri Exton, who was working for the McCann Team and Kevin Halligen?
QUESTION: If Martin Smith was so sure he’d seen Gerry McCann, why did he not simply approve of one sketch that looked similar to Gerry McCann?
QUESTION: Why, if he thought he had seen Gerry McCann, did Martin Smith approve two quite different e-fits, one of which bore very little resemblance at all to Gerry McCann?
QUESTION: Why, if he believed Gerry McCann was the person he had seen, did Martin Smith go on record and (a) express sympathy for the McCann family and (b) urge people to look for ‘the abductor’?
Phase 5
from January to May 2009:
SMITHMAN FEATURES IN A PRO-MCCANN DOCUMENTARY
Former Detective Inspector Dave Edgar appointed to lead the McCann private investigation, around November 2008. Former Detective Sergeant Arthur Cowley appointed later. They help to prepare a documentary, widely called the ‘Mockumentary’, prepared by Mentorn Media and shown by Channel 4 on May 2009. The documentary, in two lengthy passages, suggests that ‘Tannerman’ and ‘Smithman’ are one and the same
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith know that his sighting was going to be used in a pro-McCann documentary?
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith approve of the McCanns and the documentary-makers suggesting that Tannerman and Smithman were one and the same?
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith express any objection to the use of his sighting to put over to viewers that the man he said he had seen was NOT Gerry McCann?
Phase 6
from May 2009 to April 2011:
SMITHMAN PROMOTED AS A KEY SUSPECT ON THE MCCANNS’ FIND MADELEINE WEBSITE
This is the period during which the McCanns actively promoted the Smith sighting on their ‘Find Madeleine’ website, with a 30-second audio clip of a man with an Irish accent repeating a summary of the Smiths’ evidence. During this audio clip, the voice is heard to say that the man looked ’34-35’. But in his original police statement, he had said the man looked ’35-40’. This was the second time Martin Smith changed his mind, because when he was interviewed a second time by the Irish police, he gave the man’s age as ‘40’. The most likely explanation for Smith changing the age of the man from ‘40’ to ’34-35’ is because he was asked to by the McCann Team
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith object to his sighting being placed on the McCanns’ website in 2009?
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith agree to the McCanns changing the age of the man he said he’d seen to ’34 to 35’?
QUESTION: Martin Smith had previously, in his first statement said that the man looked ’35-40’. In his second statement, he changed that to ‘40’. Why, when he had said the man was ‘40’, did he now allow the McCanns to change the age to ’34-35’?
QUESTION: If he didn’t agree with the change of the age, did he ever object to this change? [NOTE: The age ‘34-35’ has remained on the McCanns’ website to this very day – over eight years in all].
Phase 7
May 2011:
SMITHMAN PROMOTED IN KATE MCCANN’S BOOK, ‘madeleine’:
When Dr Kate McCann published her book, ‘madeleine’, on 11 May 2011, seven pages of her book mentioned Smithman. Three of these seven pages consisted of an itemised list of the ‘striking similarities’ between ‘Tannerman’ and ‘Smithman’.
QUESTION: Again, given that in September 2007 Martin Smith was sure that he had seen Gerry McCann on 3 May 2007, did Martin Smith approve of his sighting being quoted on 7 pages of Kate McCann’s book? – which was all about another, ‘stranger’ abductor?
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith object in any way to his sighting being used in a book which effectively denied that he had seen Gerry McCann - and was pointing the finger at the ‘Tannerman’ sighting?
Phase 8
from May 2011 to September 2013:
DCI REDWOOD PREPARES TO REVEAL SMITHMAN AS HIS MAIN SUSPECT
DCI Andy Redwood, Head of the Met Police’s Operation Grange, talks to Martin Smith at least twice. There is on-the-record confirmation that he met Det Chief Insp Andy Redwood of Operation at least twice, once in 2012 and once in 2013. Undoubtedly this was to discuss the BBC Crimewatch McCann Special which had long been planned together with the BBC Crimewatch Team, at a cost of around £2 million
QUESTION: Why did Martin Smith meet DCI Andy Redwood in 2012?
QUESTION: Why did Martin Smith meet DCI Andy Redwood again in 2013?
QUESTION: On either, or each, of those occasions, did Martin Smith say: “Look Mr Redwood, I saw Gerry McCann carrying that child at 10pm on 3 May. I’m not having you using my sighting to suggest it was someone else”.
QUESTION: If not, why not?
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith agree for his sighting and his/his family’s two e-fits to be used in the BBC Crimewatch McCann Show?
QUESTION: If he did agree, why did he agree, if he was sure that he had seen Gerry McCann on 3 May 2007?
Phase 9
from October 2013 to now:
SMITHMAN REVEALED BY SCOTLAND YARD AS THE CHIEF SUSPECT
There was a blaze of pre-programme hype and then innumerable BBC trailers promoting the BBC Crimewatch McCann show, transmitted to an audience of 6.7 million viewers. In this broadcast, DCI Andy Redwood showed us two efits of different-looking people, implying that the Smiths drew them up. He claimed that the man represented by these two e-fits ‘is now the centre of our focus’. Despite that, the e-fits of Smithman are no longer viewable either on the Met Police website or the McCanns’ ‘Find Madeleine’ website. The audio of an Irish voice describing a man aged ‘perhaps 34-35’ is still on the McCanns’ website
FINAL TWO QUESTIONS: Do you @CarlaSpade, or does anyone else, still seriously think that Martin Smith really did see Gerry McCann carrying Madeleine on 3 May 2007?
AND: How credible do you honestly think Martin Smith’s testimony of being ‘sure’ he had seen Gerry McCann would be in a court of law? How well would that evidence stand up under cross-examination?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I hope we will get some answers…
"An answer to Carla Spade about evidence that Martin Smith collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008"
I have decided to open one further ‘Smithman’ thread and I promise that this will be my very last.
The reason for doing so is that I have been repeatedly attacked by @CarlaSpade on Twitter for allegedly having ‘no evidence’ in support of my contention that Martin Smith has actively collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008. I also say that Martin Smith has actively collaborated with Operation Grange since 2012 i.e. for the past 5 years.
These are the two tweets I am specifically responding to:
Carla Spade @CarlaSpade 07 Jun 2017
You've made several claims @zampos but you haven't been able to provide evidence for any of them. Provide it or you're a fraud [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Carla Spade @CarlaSpade 08 Jun 2017
I'm still waiting @zampos for you to provide evidence to back up these nonsense claims. You can't though can you? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
There was also this today from Ben Thompson:
Bugsy @TheBunnyReturns
The only reason I can think of that Bennett is allowed to continue [to discuss Madeleine’s disappearance], is that he discredits firm evidence that implicates Kate and Gerry [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
This, again, is a reference to the ‘Smithman’ sighting. Thompson has long taken the view that the Smithman sighting is the firmest evidence we have that Gerry McCann hid Madeleine’s body, so much so that he has maintained for two years that I am acting in cahoots with the McCanns to dismiss the ‘truth’ of this claimed sighting. He also calls me a government ‘shill’
@CarlaSpade is one of a number of followers of the Madeleine McCann case who insists that when Martin Smith - on 20 September 2007, 140 days after 3 May 2007 - told police he was ‘60% to 80% sure’ that it was Gerry McCann he had seen carrying a child that night, this is somehow absolute proof that he did in fact see Gerry McCann that night carrying his dead daughter through the streets of Praia da Luz.
All the reasons why I reject that claim are on the Smithman threads and are well known on the forum and I won’t repeat them again here.
My analysis of the claimed ‘Smithman’ sighting has, it is true, been rejected by many.
I have been accused of not believing a ‘respectable, honest, decent’ man and family, and of effectively accusing them of lying. Those who make that accusation generally think there are insufficient grounds for questioning the evidence and statements of people like Martin, Peter and Aoife Smith, Pamela Fenn and Robert Murat, despite obvious problems with all of their statements.
Along with that have been miscellaneous claims that I have been 'obsessed with Smithman', have 'banned people who disagree with me on Smithman', and 'bent on proving he is right'.
But ever since, two weeks after the BBC Crimewatch McCann Show on 14 October 2013, I began to question the truth of the ‘Smithman’ sighting, another more serious accusation has been leveled at me by people who post elsewhere and on Twitter. They say I am ‘a pro-McCann in disguise’. They accuse me of ‘destroying the best evidence there is that Gerry McCann hid his daughter’s body’. They insinuate that I have done a ‘dirty deal’ with the McCanns.
After I was found guilty of contempt of the High Court in February 2013, I did do a deal with the McCanns. I agreed to cancel my appeal to the Court of Appeal against the High Court ruling, and at the same time agreed to cancel my application to be freed from the various undertakings I was forced to give to the McCanns back in November 2009. In return, they agreed to substantially reduce what was an enormous costs bill against me, which they estimated at over £300,000. They had employed two barristers against me to make sure I was defeated. That is what the deal was about. The McCanns gained the benefit of my withdrawing an appeal and an application. I gained a substantial reduction in my costs bill. It is as simple as that.
But some insist loudly on Twitter and elsewhere that it was a ‘grubby deal’ to attack the Smith sighting on the McCanns’ behalf (!). Some go further and allege that I am a paid government ‘shill’. These accusations are made repeatedly on the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] hashtag on Twitter and on forums which purport to campaign for the truth about what really happened to Madeleine McCann.
I would not normally reply to someone like @CarlaSpade, whose attacks have been relentless, aggressive, and laced with bad language.
Nevertheless it gives me one final opportunity to explain how Martin Smith clearly worked for and collaborated with the McCanns from January 2008 onwards.
I will answer @CarlaSpade by reproducing the OP of ‘SMITHMAN8’ (The Nine Phases of Smithman) and in bold are my questions, which she and anyone else who still believes that Martin Smith hasn’t been working for the McCann Team must answer:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
THE NINE PHASES OF SMITHMAN
Phase 1
from 3 to 15 May 2007:
AN UNREPORTED SIGHTING
The Smiths claim to have seen a man carrying a child at about 10.00pm on 3 May, but do not report it – a baffling delay. They give several contradictory reasons for not reporting what they say they saw
Phase 2
from 16 May to 20 September 2007:
A REPORTED SIGHTING
On 16 May The Smiths get round to reporting what they say they saw – the day after someone they know, Robert Murat, is made an unofficial suspect in the case. The Portuguese Police interview three members of the Smith family on 26 May. Martin Smith is adamant that the man he saw was not Robert Murat. All the three Smiths admit they saw the man in the dark and for a few seconds at the most, and agree that none of them would be ablse to recognise him again if they saw him
Phase 3
from 20 September to December 2007:
COULD IT BE GERRY MCCANN?
Martin Smith triggers new interest in the sighting by claiming that he was 60% to 80% sure that he really saw Gerry McCann that night in early May. He bases this on the way Gerry McCann carried his son Sean down the steps of an aeroplane on 9 September. He delays reporting his new belief for 11 days
Phase 4
from January 2008 to December 2008:
THE MCCANNS TAKE OVER THE SMITH SIGHTING
Newspaper articles on 3 and 4 January 2008 reveal that Metodo 3 have ‘already’ been in touch with the Smiths - and that Cheshire businessman Brian Kennedy, one of the McCann Team, is also involved. The Sun reported that “Investigators from the Metodo 3 agency hired by Maddie's parents Gerry and Kate are preparing to travel to Ireland to interview them”. Kennedy contacts the Smiths. Henri Exton, and possibly Irishman Kevin Halligen, visits the Smiths and produces two e-fits of what, to many people, looks like two different men: different face shape and size, differences in chin and nose length, hair style and so on. From this moment on, Martin Smith drops his identification of the man he says he saw as Gerry McCann, supports the McCanns’ search for the abductor, and in effect becomes a McCann supporter, working with the McCann Team
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith know that Metodo 3 and Brian Kennedy were working for the McCanns? [CLUE: QUOTE > The Sun reported that “Investigators from the Metodo 3 agency hired by Maddie's parents Gerry and Kate are preparing to travel to Ireland to interview them”.]
QUESTION: If Martin Smith was sure he’d seen Gerry McCann on 3 May 2007, why would he even agree to speak to people from Metodo 3 and to Brian Kennedy?
QUESTION: Why did Martin Smith (and/or other members of the Smith family) agree to draw up e-fits with Henri Exton, who was working for the McCann Team and Kevin Halligen?
QUESTION: If Martin Smith was so sure he’d seen Gerry McCann, why did he not simply approve of one sketch that looked similar to Gerry McCann?
QUESTION: Why, if he thought he had seen Gerry McCann, did Martin Smith approve two quite different e-fits, one of which bore very little resemblance at all to Gerry McCann?
QUESTION: Why, if he believed Gerry McCann was the person he had seen, did Martin Smith go on record and (a) express sympathy for the McCann family and (b) urge people to look for ‘the abductor’?
Phase 5
from January to May 2009:
SMITHMAN FEATURES IN A PRO-MCCANN DOCUMENTARY
Former Detective Inspector Dave Edgar appointed to lead the McCann private investigation, around November 2008. Former Detective Sergeant Arthur Cowley appointed later. They help to prepare a documentary, widely called the ‘Mockumentary’, prepared by Mentorn Media and shown by Channel 4 on May 2009. The documentary, in two lengthy passages, suggests that ‘Tannerman’ and ‘Smithman’ are one and the same
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith know that his sighting was going to be used in a pro-McCann documentary?
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith approve of the McCanns and the documentary-makers suggesting that Tannerman and Smithman were one and the same?
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith express any objection to the use of his sighting to put over to viewers that the man he said he had seen was NOT Gerry McCann?
Phase 6
from May 2009 to April 2011:
SMITHMAN PROMOTED AS A KEY SUSPECT ON THE MCCANNS’ FIND MADELEINE WEBSITE
This is the period during which the McCanns actively promoted the Smith sighting on their ‘Find Madeleine’ website, with a 30-second audio clip of a man with an Irish accent repeating a summary of the Smiths’ evidence. During this audio clip, the voice is heard to say that the man looked ’34-35’. But in his original police statement, he had said the man looked ’35-40’. This was the second time Martin Smith changed his mind, because when he was interviewed a second time by the Irish police, he gave the man’s age as ‘40’. The most likely explanation for Smith changing the age of the man from ‘40’ to ’34-35’ is because he was asked to by the McCann Team
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith object to his sighting being placed on the McCanns’ website in 2009?
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith agree to the McCanns changing the age of the man he said he’d seen to ’34 to 35’?
QUESTION: Martin Smith had previously, in his first statement said that the man looked ’35-40’. In his second statement, he changed that to ‘40’. Why, when he had said the man was ‘40’, did he now allow the McCanns to change the age to ’34-35’?
QUESTION: If he didn’t agree with the change of the age, did he ever object to this change? [NOTE: The age ‘34-35’ has remained on the McCanns’ website to this very day – over eight years in all].
Phase 7
May 2011:
SMITHMAN PROMOTED IN KATE MCCANN’S BOOK, ‘madeleine’:
When Dr Kate McCann published her book, ‘madeleine’, on 11 May 2011, seven pages of her book mentioned Smithman. Three of these seven pages consisted of an itemised list of the ‘striking similarities’ between ‘Tannerman’ and ‘Smithman’.
QUESTION: Again, given that in September 2007 Martin Smith was sure that he had seen Gerry McCann on 3 May 2007, did Martin Smith approve of his sighting being quoted on 7 pages of Kate McCann’s book? – which was all about another, ‘stranger’ abductor?
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith object in any way to his sighting being used in a book which effectively denied that he had seen Gerry McCann - and was pointing the finger at the ‘Tannerman’ sighting?
Phase 8
from May 2011 to September 2013:
DCI REDWOOD PREPARES TO REVEAL SMITHMAN AS HIS MAIN SUSPECT
DCI Andy Redwood, Head of the Met Police’s Operation Grange, talks to Martin Smith at least twice. There is on-the-record confirmation that he met Det Chief Insp Andy Redwood of Operation at least twice, once in 2012 and once in 2013. Undoubtedly this was to discuss the BBC Crimewatch McCann Special which had long been planned together with the BBC Crimewatch Team, at a cost of around £2 million
QUESTION: Why did Martin Smith meet DCI Andy Redwood in 2012?
QUESTION: Why did Martin Smith meet DCI Andy Redwood again in 2013?
QUESTION: On either, or each, of those occasions, did Martin Smith say: “Look Mr Redwood, I saw Gerry McCann carrying that child at 10pm on 3 May. I’m not having you using my sighting to suggest it was someone else”.
QUESTION: If not, why not?
QUESTION: Did Martin Smith agree for his sighting and his/his family’s two e-fits to be used in the BBC Crimewatch McCann Show?
QUESTION: If he did agree, why did he agree, if he was sure that he had seen Gerry McCann on 3 May 2007?
Phase 9
from October 2013 to now:
SMITHMAN REVEALED BY SCOTLAND YARD AS THE CHIEF SUSPECT
There was a blaze of pre-programme hype and then innumerable BBC trailers promoting the BBC Crimewatch McCann show, transmitted to an audience of 6.7 million viewers. In this broadcast, DCI Andy Redwood showed us two efits of different-looking people, implying that the Smiths drew them up. He claimed that the man represented by these two e-fits ‘is now the centre of our focus’. Despite that, the e-fits of Smithman are no longer viewable either on the Met Police website or the McCanns’ ‘Find Madeleine’ website. The audio of an Irish voice describing a man aged ‘perhaps 34-35’ is still on the McCanns’ website
FINAL TWO QUESTIONS: Do you @CarlaSpade, or does anyone else, still seriously think that Martin Smith really did see Gerry McCann carrying Madeleine on 3 May 2007?
AND: How credible do you honestly think Martin Smith’s testimony of being ‘sure’ he had seen Gerry McCann would be in a court of law? How well would that evidence stand up under cross-examination?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I hope we will get some answers…
____________________
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- Investigator
- Posts : 16926
Activity : 24792
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: SMITHMAN 11 An answer to Carla Spade about evidence that Martin Smith collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008
by sallypelt 16.06.17 11:19
There is a lot of discussion, lately, regarding the Smiths sighting of a man seen carrying a child at around 10:00 PM on the night of the 3rd of May. I have a few concerns about this claim. The main one being, was Gerry McCann in the Ocean Club area at 10:00 PM as so many people have claimed. If this IS the case, then it couldn’t have been Gerry McCann who the Smiths saw that night. So, if it wasn’t Gerry, who was it? I cannot imagine that if the Smiths saw a man carrying a child that night, that person in question would not have come forward. It just wouldn’t happen. The case is known world-wide. Moreover, why didn’t anyone else see a man carrying a child? There were pubs along that road, weren’t there?
So, if Gerry McCann WAS around the Ocean Club at the time the Smiths said they saw a man carrying a child, it could NOT have been Gerry McCann. So, the question is now, why the scurrying and panic on the night in question. What threw the plan into panic mode? For what it is worth, I have always felt that Jeremy Wilkins threw a spanner in the works when he “bumped in” to Gerry McCann, that night. Now there was a problem. The timeline would have to be altered, and this is where I believe the whole plan began to fall apart. No time for Gerry McCann to “jemmy” the shutters, as pre-planned, but too late to stop this information going out to the McCanns friends and family via the mobile and telephones. Already the wheels had come off, what otherwise may have been the “perfect crime”.
Here are a few examples of Martin Smith allegedly withdrawing his claim the he saw Gerry McCann, the night of the 3rd of May 2007:
Additional statement by Martin Smith, 30 January 2008
Cover note
Detective Branch
Drogheda
County Lough
Re – Investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann
I took an additional statement from Mr Smith as requested. His wife does not want to make another statement. I showed him the video clip and he stated that it was not the clip that alerted him but the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007.
He has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits. He sent a solicitor’s letter to six papers in relation material that was printed that was misquoted. The Evening Herald paid his solicitor's fees and all papers printed an apology. His photograph appeared in another tabloid paper and this matter is being pursued at the moment.
I do not believe that Martin Smith is courting the press and my view his is a genuine person. He is known locally and is a very decent person.
Forwarded please
Sergeant
L*** H****
That is clear evidence imo that Martin Smith did not allow newspapers to get away with misquoting him.
The fact that he apparently made no complaint - or request for the the momentous claim made in the Sunday Times that he no longer believed it was Gerry he saw - to be retracted or an apology issued - is at complete odds with his proven track record towards newspapers who misquoted him. If that claim in the ST was indeed a complete lie - then it was a massive one and no way IMO would MS have let it remain unchallenged.
Common sense dictates that the only logical reason for his lack of action is because the claim made about him was correct.
Quote from Sunday Times
There was also an uncomfortable complication with Smith’s account. He had originally told the police that he had “recognised something” about the way Gerry McCann carried one of his children which reminded him of the man he had seen in Praia da Luz.
Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, [not my highlight] and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.
Unquote
Make of it, what you will!
As anyone got the link to the Sunday Times where this quote was taken from?
So, if Gerry McCann WAS around the Ocean Club at the time the Smiths said they saw a man carrying a child, it could NOT have been Gerry McCann. So, the question is now, why the scurrying and panic on the night in question. What threw the plan into panic mode? For what it is worth, I have always felt that Jeremy Wilkins threw a spanner in the works when he “bumped in” to Gerry McCann, that night. Now there was a problem. The timeline would have to be altered, and this is where I believe the whole plan began to fall apart. No time for Gerry McCann to “jemmy” the shutters, as pre-planned, but too late to stop this information going out to the McCanns friends and family via the mobile and telephones. Already the wheels had come off, what otherwise may have been the “perfect crime”.
Here are a few examples of Martin Smith allegedly withdrawing his claim the he saw Gerry McCann, the night of the 3rd of May 2007:
Additional statement by Martin Smith, 30 January 2008
Cover note
Detective Branch
Drogheda
County Lough
Re – Investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann
I took an additional statement from Mr Smith as requested. His wife does not want to make another statement. I showed him the video clip and he stated that it was not the clip that alerted him but the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007.
He has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits. He sent a solicitor’s letter to six papers in relation material that was printed that was misquoted. The Evening Herald paid his solicitor's fees and all papers printed an apology. His photograph appeared in another tabloid paper and this matter is being pursued at the moment.
I do not believe that Martin Smith is courting the press and my view his is a genuine person. He is known locally and is a very decent person.
Forwarded please
Sergeant
L*** H****
That is clear evidence imo that Martin Smith did not allow newspapers to get away with misquoting him.
The fact that he apparently made no complaint - or request for the the momentous claim made in the Sunday Times that he no longer believed it was Gerry he saw - to be retracted or an apology issued - is at complete odds with his proven track record towards newspapers who misquoted him. If that claim in the ST was indeed a complete lie - then it was a massive one and no way IMO would MS have let it remain unchallenged.
Common sense dictates that the only logical reason for his lack of action is because the claim made about him was correct.
Quote from Sunday Times
There was also an uncomfortable complication with Smith’s account. He had originally told the police that he had “recognised something” about the way Gerry McCann carried one of his children which reminded him of the man he had seen in Praia da Luz.
Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, [not my highlight] and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.
Unquote
Make of it, what you will!
As anyone got the link to the Sunday Times where this quote was taken from?
sallypelt- Posts : 4004
Activity : 5319
Likes received : 961
Join date : 2012-11-10
Re: SMITHMAN 11 An answer to Carla Spade about evidence that Martin Smith collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008
by Jill Havern 16.06.17 11:40
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It looks like it was from a paper edition of the Sunday Times:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It looks like it was from a paper edition of the Sunday Times:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
____________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MAGA [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MBGA
Jill Havern- Chief Faffer, Forum Owner
- Posts : 31121
Activity : 43935
Likes received : 7758
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe -
Re: SMITHMAN 11 An answer to Carla Spade about evidence that Martin Smith collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008
by sallypelt 16.06.17 12:24
Snipped from the above article:Get'emGonçalo wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It looks like it was from a paper edition of the Sunday Times:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.
That should keep a few sceptics happy and informed. As I've said, the research on this Forum is second to none, regardless that some, who cannot accept that this Forum is number one, when it comes the to McCann case.
K
sallypelt- Posts : 4004
Activity : 5319
Likes received : 961
Join date : 2012-11-10
Re: SMITHMAN 11 An answer to Carla Spade about evidence that Martin Smith collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008
by Jill Havern 16.06.17 12:27
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]sallypelt wrote:Snipped from the above article:Get'emGonçalo wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It looks like it was from a paper edition of the Sunday Times:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.
That should keep a few sceptics happy and informed. As I've said, the research on this Forum is second to none, regardless that some, who cannot accept that this Forum is number one, when it comes the to McCann case.
K
Nope, it doesn't. Carla is off on one again.____________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MAGA [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MBGA
Jill Havern- Chief Faffer, Forum Owner
- Posts : 31121
Activity : 43935
Likes received : 7758
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe -
Re: SMITHMAN 11 An answer to Carla Spade about evidence that Martin Smith collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008
by sandancer 16.06.17 12:40
Funny isn't it that the " cesspit " full of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]# shills is steadily gaining new members daily , and has many guest readers .
Still I suppose we're all " socks " and Jill manipulates the numbers , right Jill ?
The hate and vitriol spewed by some really sickens me
This is about Madeleine , not a personal vendetta .
Still I suppose we're all " socks " and Jill manipulates the numbers , right Jill ?
The hate and vitriol spewed by some really sickens me
This is about Madeleine , not a personal vendetta .
____________________
Be humble for you are made of earth . Be noble for you are made of stars .
sandancer- Forum support
- Posts : 1337
Activity : 2429
Likes received : 1096
Join date : 2016-02-18
Age : 71
Location : Tyneside
Re: SMITHMAN 11 An answer to Carla Spade about evidence that Martin Smith collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008
by sallypelt 16.06.17 12:46
Just read this across the way in response to the Times newspaper article posted on here:
Yes, just newspaper articles, Jill has just posted on twitter, which is absolutely not evidence at all. Suddenly they are believing what they read in the press, which is the first thing you would get pulled up on if you used that over there..
A bit rich "in it", coming from a forum that stands on nothing BUT newspaper reports.
I don't know why I even bother to read over there. I have now STOPPED!
Yes, just newspaper articles, Jill has just posted on twitter, which is absolutely not evidence at all. Suddenly they are believing what they read in the press, which is the first thing you would get pulled up on if you used that over there..
A bit rich "in it", coming from a forum that stands on nothing BUT newspaper reports.I don't know why I even bother to read over there. I have now STOPPED!
sallypelt- Posts : 4004
Activity : 5319
Likes received : 961
Join date : 2012-11-10
Re: SMITHMAN 11 An answer to Carla Spade about evidence that Martin Smith collaborated with the McCann Team since January 2008
by Rob Royston 16.06.17 21:23
Are we talking about the same Martin Smith, here? I seem to remember there was a doppelganger.sallypelt wrote:Snipped from the above article:Get'emGonçalo wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
It looks like it was from a paper edition of the Sunday Times:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Smith has since stressed that he does not believe the man he saw was Gerry, and Scotland Yard do not consider this a possibility. Last week the McCanns were told officially by the Portuguese authorities that they are not suspects.
That should keep a few sceptics happy and informed. As I've said, the research on this Forum is second to none, regardless that some, who cannot accept that this Forum is number one, when it comes the to McCann case.
Rob Royston- Posts : 112
Activity : 152
Likes received : 40
Join date : 2012-07-06
Similar topics» SMITHMAN 8 - The Nine Phases of Smithman - How the Smiths became part of the McCann Team in January 2008
» Martin Smith's evidence was considered by the PJ to be 'highly contradictory...this type of witness does not deserve credibility" 24 Horas, 7.7.2008
» After Netflix & Saunkonoko highlighted the Smithman sighting, how likely is it that Martin Smith co-operated with the McCanns?
» SMITHMAN 4: A summary of discrepancies in what the Smiths say about their 'sighting'
» Gerry McCann is the McStroller
» Martin Smith's evidence was considered by the PJ to be 'highly contradictory...this type of witness does not deserve credibility" 24 Horas, 7.7.2008
» After Netflix & Saunkonoko highlighted the Smithman sighting, how likely is it that Martin Smith co-operated with the McCanns?
» SMITHMAN 4: A summary of discrepancies in what the Smiths say about their 'sighting'
» Gerry McCann is the McStroller
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
