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.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!


POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Page 5 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Smithman: Real or fake? Where are we all currently at?

1. I believe the McCanns are rattled by Smithman, and HAVEN'T promoted him, because it really WAS Gerry carrying Maddie's corpse to the beach. He DIDN'T intend to be seen;
 
2. As above but DID intend to be seen, but NOT recognised;
 
3. I believe Smithman really WAS Gerry but carrying a (sedated?) pyjama-clad DECOY child in the cold, playing a role in the staged abduction. He INTENDED to be seen, but NOT recognised;
 
4. I believe Maddie died days earlier, that Smithman is yet another FAKE story, that the McCanns, Grange and the BBC HAVE promoted this sighting for all its worth, to keep us looking at 3rd May because without Smithman they are SUNK as there is NO evidenc
 
5. I believe the Smith sighting IS GENUINE, but they COULD have seen another INNOCENT dad like Crecheman carrying his sleeping, pyjama-clad daughter in the cold, who just happened to look like Gerry McCann, but is UNAWARE he has been MISTAKEN as an abduct
 
6. I believe the Smith sighting is genuine, that Maddie really WAS abducted and the Smith's saw the REAL abductor, and that's why he hasn't come forward to eliminate himself;
 
7. Don't know.
 
 
 
View results

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Jill Havern on 11.02.18 20:24

I believe Maddie met her demise on 3rd May, the McCanns are rattled by Smithman, and HAVEN'T promoted him, because it really WAS Gerry carrying Maddie's corpse in the direction of the beach. He DIDN'T intend to be seen;


Is this ok? I can add it.
avatar
Jill Havern


Posts : 11915
Reputation : 5643
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by pennylane on 11.02.18 21:15

Get'emGonçalo wrote:I believe Maddie met her demise on 3rd May, the McCanns are rattled by Smithman, and HAVEN'T promoted him, because it really WAS Gerry carrying Maddie's corpse in the direction of the beach. He DIDN'T intend to be seen;


Is this ok? I can add it.
Oh thank you Jill, that's very kind of you singlerose

That is precisely my belief (and others out there would concur), but would it not at this juncture confuse this particular poll, as many have already voted?  No 1 as it stands is still very good (imo).

pennylane

Posts : 2770
Reputation : 1619
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Jill Havern on 11.02.18 21:23

@pennylane wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:I believe Maddie met her demise on 3rd May, the McCanns are rattled by Smithman, and HAVEN'T promoted him, because it really WAS Gerry carrying Maddie's corpse in the direction of the beach. He DIDN'T intend to be seen;


Is this ok? I can add it.
Oh thank you Jill, that's very kind of you singlerose

That is precisely my belief (and others out there would concur), but would it not at this juncture confuse this particular poll, as many have already voted?
Unfortunately, yes it would....

But I can't delete this Poll and create a new one on this thread.

So, what am I to do? Add it, or leave it?
avatar
Jill Havern


Posts : 11915
Reputation : 5643
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by pennylane on 11.02.18 21:26

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
@pennylane wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:I believe Maddie met her demise on 3rd May, the McCanns are rattled by Smithman, and HAVEN'T promoted him, because it really WAS Gerry carrying Maddie's corpse in the direction of the beach. He DIDN'T intend to be seen;


Is this ok? I can add it.
Oh thank you Jill, that's very kind of you singlerose

That is precisely my belief (and others out there would concur), but would it not at this juncture confuse this particular poll, as many have already voted?
Unfortunately, yes it would....

But I can't delete it this Poll and create a new one on this thread.

So, what am I to do? Add it, or leave it?
I personally think it is a very good poll and covers many options fairly.   hello

pennylane

Posts : 2770
Reputation : 1619
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Jill Havern on 11.02.18 21:29

You want me to leave it as it is then?

(just checking!)
avatar
Jill Havern


Posts : 11915
Reputation : 5643
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by pennylane on 11.02.18 21:30

Get'emGonçalo wrote:You want me to leave it as it is then?

(just checking!)

Yes, I think you've done a good job of it!  roses

pennylane

Posts : 2770
Reputation : 1619
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Jill Havern on 11.02.18 21:32

@pennylane wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:You want me to leave it as it is then?

(just checking!)

Yes, I think you've done a good job of it!  roses
 hat
avatar
Jill Havern


Posts : 11915
Reputation : 5643
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by pennylane on 11.02.18 21:42

Get'emGonçalo wrote:
@pennylane wrote:
Get'emGonçalo wrote:You want me to leave it as it is then?

(just checking!)

Yes, I think you've done a good job of it!  roses
 hat
 Awww I like that little guy! 
Honestly I think you must be seeing stars after covering all those varying options  confused  I appreciate the work that went into it.  Thank you Jill  wave

pennylane

Posts : 2770
Reputation : 1619
Join date : 2009-12-07

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by polyenne on 11.02.18 22:07

As Verdi correctly stated, you could have offered 20 options and still not covered them all such are the convolutions of the case.

You did well and I’d leave it at that for fear of giving yourself a coronary !!

polyenne

Posts : 857
Reputation : 515
Join date : 2017-03-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Verdi on 11.02.18 23:13

Get'emGonçalo wrote:I would add another option, but unfortunately there's a certain person from twitter who's been sabotaging the Poll anyway and comes here to vote as a guest on various devices, iPhones, and browsers to inform us that 'Gerry is Smithman'.

Whoever this interloper is, he/she/they/that/those must be pretty desperate. This is just an innocent forum poll to gauge general opinion - when a rough idea of of opposing opinion is realised, then it's time to concentrate on specific areas in order to iron out the creases.

My advice to the saboteur - leave it until you've got a good case to present against the prevailing opinion. Only next time, to add more credence to your opposition, try being open and not anonymously voting on an open poll.

You know it makes sense.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8701
Reputation : 3900
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by nglfi on 12.02.18 5:39

'As Verdi correctly stated, you could have offered 20 options and still not covered them all such are the convolutions of the case.

You did well and I’d leave it at that for fear of giving yourself a coronary !!'

Completely agree!
I would add again though, to those who feel it is preposterous that Gerry would carry Madeleine in the street , isn't it also preposterous therefore that she was moved in the Scenic?
3 weeks after her 'disappearance', her body would have started to decompose (sorry to be graphic). Hypothetically after dealing with something so traumatic as the death of one's baby, (most normal people would find this traumatic), either Gerry or Kate had to return to the scene of wherever they left her. Then pick her dead body up, put it in the Scenic, and drive around with it to wherever it finally lay, and still is now. They can't have been 100% sure no govt agency was tailing them. Yet they took that risk. To me this is a horrendous and bizarre situation, yet this is what the dogs suggest may have happened. Either way 'A' dead body was moved in that car. And I believe that hypothesis.
All IMO.



nglfi

Posts : 535
Reputation : 252
Join date : 2014-01-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Phoebe on 12.02.18 11:05

The moving of the body in the Scenic has to be the most bizarre twist in this awful saga. I can only assume that they feared the searches might find her. This would have played badly for them on several fronts - Whatever they were afraid of an autopsy uncovering might still be discernible; if it emerged that their negligence had cost Madeleine her life, public opinion would completely lose any sympathy and turn against them them and, of course, there would be no opportunity for them to jump on the missing children bandwagon as they did. The search fund would also be at risk. But why oh why use their own vehicle if they were being given such high level help and assistance? Why didn't those powerful agencies allegedly involved take care of this extremely risky undertaking for them?

Phoebe

Posts : 882
Reputation : 1029
Join date : 2017-03-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Jill Havern on 12.02.18 11:48

One of the members of CMOMM facebook is a geneticist and I know I've posted one of her articles on this forum, although can't find it at the moment, but I saw a comment from her the other day which seems apt to post on this thread:

Janine Bresnick There is no actual evidence that her body was in the car weeks later.
Tiny traces of her blood was found which could have come from previously frozen, bloodied cleaning cloths and clothing that was subsequently transported to the tip and it melted.
avatar
Jill Havern


Posts : 11915
Reputation : 5643
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : parallel universe

View user profile http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Verdi on 12.02.18 12:34

'
ngllfi wrote:As Verdi correctly stated, you could have offered 20 options and still not covered them all such are the convolutions of the case.

You did well and I’d leave it at that for fear of giving yourself a coronary !!'

Completely agree!
I would add again though, to those who feel it is preposterous that Gerry would carry Madeleine in the street , isn't it also preposterous therefore that she was moved in the Scenic?
3 weeks after her 'disappearance', her body would have started to decompose (sorry to be graphic). Hypothetically after dealing with something so traumatic as the death of one's baby, (most normal people would find this traumatic), either Gerry or Kate had to return to the scene of wherever they left her. Then pick her dead body up, put it in the Scenic, and drive around with it to wherever it finally lay, and still is now. They can't have been 100% sure no govt agency was tailing them. Yet they took that risk. To me this is a horrendous and bizarre situation, yet this is what the dogs suggest may have happened. Either way 'A' dead body was moved in that car. And I believe that hypothesis.
All IMO.

Realistically, it could have have been any number of persons driving the Renault Scenic - following the 10:00 pm alert on Thursday 3rd May, there was no shortage of helping hands ever present in the form of friends and relations.

Besides, the dog alerts were never corroborated by forensic laboratory analysis so it's only an assumption that it could have been connected with Madeleine's disappearance.  Alas, the PJ were prevented from following where the investigation was leading.

Still, this is straying off topic.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8701
Reputation : 3900
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by nglfi on 12.02.18 12:56

@Verdi wrote:'
ngllfi wrote:As Verdi correctly stated, you could have offered 20 options and still not covered them all such are the convolutions of the case.

You did well and I’d leave it at that for fear of giving yourself a coronary !!'

Completely agree!
I would add again though, to those who feel it is preposterous that Gerry would carry Madeleine in the street , isn't it also preposterous therefore that she was moved in the Scenic?
3 weeks after her 'disappearance', her body would have started to decompose (sorry to be graphic). Hypothetically after dealing with something so traumatic as the death of one's baby, (most normal people would find this traumatic), either Gerry or Kate had to return to the scene of wherever they left her. Then pick her dead body up, put it in the Scenic, and drive around with it to wherever it finally lay, and still is now. They can't have been 100% sure no govt agency was tailing them. Yet they took that risk. To me this is a horrendous and bizarre situation, yet this is what the dogs suggest may have happened. Either way 'A' dead body was moved in that car. And I believe that hypothesis.
All IMO.

Realistically, it could have have been any number of persons driving the Renault Scenic - following the 10:00 pm alert on Thursday 3rd May, there was no shortage of helping hands ever present in the form of friends and relations.

Besides, the dog alerts were never corroborated by forensic laboratory analysis so it's only an assumption that it could have been connected with Madeleine's disappearance.  Alas, the PJ were prevented from following where the investigation was leading.

Still, this is straying off topic.
The dog alerts weren't corroborated, making a court case very difficult to assemble. Logical deduction points the finger in one clear direction though . I'd say the presence of cadaver odour on Gerry and Kate's clothes suggests they had a hand in moving her.
Sorry if it's straying off topic, I'm just trying to illustrate that in desperation people are capable of things that under normal circumstances none of us would ever consider. And in this sense it' not impossible that Smithman is genuine, on the mere basis that it's unlikely he'd carry her body through the street in order to dispose of her.

nglfi

Posts : 535
Reputation : 252
Join date : 2014-01-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Verdi on 12.02.18 13:25

Only three members of the Smith family gave formal statements to the PJ on 26th May 2007. Martin Smith being the main man, I reproduce here part of his witness statement relative to the stranger encountered carrying a child. This needs to be scrutinized carefully in order to identify grey areas and it's also important to not that Martin Smith's scheduled leaving date from Praia da Luz was 9th May - six days after Madeleine's alleged disappearance..

As he reached this artery, he saw an individual carrying a child, who walked normally and fitted in perfectly in that area, in that it is common to see people carrying children, at least during the holiday season.

He only saw him as they passed each other. He assumed it was a father and daughter, not raising any suspicion.

Urged, states that when he passed this individual it would have been around 22H00, and at the time he was completely unaware that a child had disappeared. He only became aware of the disappearance of the child the next morning, through his daughter, L*****, in Ireland who had sent him a message or called him regarding what had happened. At this point he thought that MADELEINE could have been the child he saw with the individual.

Regarding the description of the individual who carried the child he states that: he was Caucasian, around 175 to 180m in height. He appeared to be about 35/40 years old. He had an average build, a bit on the thin side. His hair was short, in a basic male cut, brown in colour. He cannot state if it was dark or lighter in tone. He did not wear glasses and had no beard or moustache. He did not notice any other relevant details partly due to the fact that the lighting was not very good.

He was wearing cream or beige-coloured cloth trousers in a classic cut. He did not see his shoes. He did not notice the body clothing and cannot describe the colour or fashion of the same.

He states that the child was female, about four years of age as she was similar to his granddaughter of the same age. She was a child of normal build, about a metre in height though not being absolutely certain of that as she was being carried. The child has blonde medium-hued hair, without being very light. Her skin was very white, typical of a Brit. He did not notice her eyes as she was asleep and her eyelids were closed.

She was wearing light-coloured pyjamas. He cannot state with certainty the colour. She was not covered by any wrap or blanket. He cannot confirm whether she was barefoot but in his group, they spoke about the child having no cover on her feet.


Urged, he states that the individual did not appear to be a tourist. He cannot explain this further. It was simply his perception given the individual's clothing. He states that the individual carried the child in his arms, with her head laying on the individual's left shoulder, that being to the right of the deponent. He adds that he did not hold the child in a comfortable position, suggesting [the carrying] not being habitual.

Having already seen various photographs of MADELEINE and televised images, states that the child who was carried by the individual could have been her. He cannot state this as fact but is convinced that it could have been MADELEINE, also the opinion shared by his family.

Questioned, says that the individual did not speak nor did the child as she was in a deep sleep.

States that it is not possible for him to recognise the individual in person or by photograph.
----------

So..

It's common to see people carrying children, especially at that time of year - and yet the stranger didn't look like a tourist. The stranger fully clothed carrying a child in pyjamas, in all probability bare foot, at around 10:00 pm at night in the beginning of May?

The lighting was poor and they only passed by in the street - and yet Mr Smith can be so precise about detail, noting specifics but not noticing other detail?

The child was pale skinned, like a Brit - and yet the child's face was obscured and the lighting was poor. Why a Brit, why not Swedish or Icelandic or Australian?

Mr Smith received a phone call the following day about a missing child - and yet he waits so long before giving a formal statement, knowing full well that he and his family saw a stranger walking the streets the night before?

On 26th May after seeing photographs of the missing child and television reports, he is almost certain the child he and his family saw could have been Madeleine - and yet, as has been pointed out so many times before, the resort was swamped by journalists and police within hours of Madeleine's alleged disappearance?

Mr Smith clearly says he wouldn't be able to recognize the stranger again in person or photograph - and yet four months later he can identify someone seen on television, alighting an aircraft in broad daylight within 60/80% certainty?

Go figure!

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8701
Reputation : 3900
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Verdi on 12.02.18 13:38

@nglfi wrote:The dog alerts weren't corroborated, making a court case very difficult to assemble. Logical deduction points the finger in one clear direction though . I'd say the presence of cadaver odour on Gerry and Kate's clothes suggests they had a hand in moving her.
Sorry if it's straying off topic, I'm just trying to illustrate that in desperation people are capable of things that under normal circumstances none of us would ever consider. And in this sense it' not impossible that Smithman is genuine, on the mere basis that it's unlikely he'd carry her body through the street in order to dispose of her.

Firstly, as far as I'm aware, the dogs never alerted to any item of clothing belonging to Gerry McCann - in all probability because his clothing wasn't available for inspection winkwink .

The odour on the Kate McCann's clothing, as with other items one wouldn't expect to have come into direct contact with a cadavar, could have been by contamination or even she was wearing the clothes when Madeleine met with a tragic accident. The latter I think unlikely for the simple reason that Kate McCann was still wearing the harlequin trews after the event - even on return to the UK !!! In panic mode, the first thing anyone would think is to destroy the evidence.

Personally, I don't believe any of this strengthens the argument that it could have been Gerry McCann carrying the body of a child around the streets of Praia da Luz on the night of 3rd May. A dark night, a three year old child - so many alternative possibilities to consider, the Smith sighting being the most unlikely. Or as I said - preposterous!

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8701
Reputation : 3900
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Verity on 12.02.18 13:59

The child has blonde medium-hued hair, without being very light. Her skin was very white, typical of a Brit. He did not notice her eyes as she was asleep and her eyelids were closed.


As the child was being carried over Smithman's shoulder, how could Martin Smith see her eyelids to tell that she was asleep? Was he walking behind Smithman?

He said he only saw him as they passed each other. He assumed it was a father and daughter, not raising any suspicion.  So if, as he implies, Smithman was walking towards him why did he turn around to check out the child if there was nothing suspicious about it?
avatar
Verity

Posts : 61
Reputation : 44
Join date : 2016-07-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by JRP on 12.02.18 14:06

#79 Phoebe's answer to Mr Noodles

Makes it sound as though MI5 or MI6 were looking for somebody to make a sighting of Smithman on the spare of the moment and couldn't find anyone better than a Granddad already returned home from holiday to Ireland.

I have no idea if Smith is an MI5/6 asset or not, he probably isn't,  but MI5/6 employ ordinary people so that they blend in without being noticed. That's the whole point of being a spy/asset, that nobody knows who they are.

Also, as far as I'm aware these people don't have any great power, they are left to their own devices and rely on cunning which is part of their training. If caught by another government, they get very little help and can't say who they work for.

On another note, during the mid 2000's around 2005/6 there was a lot of activity in Ireland as there was a push to build new houses and flats. A large number of property speculators who buy "new builds" to sell on later or those who "buy to let" (off plan) i.e purchaseing a property or flat in a new building before the building was complete were attracted.

Large amounts of properties were sold to speculators and when the financial crisis stuck, those properties were not built. I think that domestic buying caused a problem in Ireland and not the likes of Smith buying a holiday home abroad.

JRP

Posts : 594
Reputation : 542
Join date : 2016-03-07
Age : 60
Location : UK

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Verdi on 12.02.18 15:52

@Verity wrote:The child has blonde medium-hued hair, without being very light. Her skin was very white, typical of a Brit. He did not notice her eyes as she was asleep and her eyelids were closed.


As the child was being carried over Smithman's shoulder, how could Martin Smith see her eyelids to tell that she was asleep? Was he walking behind Smithman?

He said he only saw him as they passed each other. He assumed it was a father and daughter, not raising any suspicion.  So if, as he implies, Smithman was walking towards him why did he turn around to check out the child if there was nothing suspicious about it?

Think Jane Tanner think !  Apart from Smithman's child being vertical and Tannerman's child being horizontal - the description is almost word perfect.  Funny that innit?

Don't anyone dare say Martin Smith wouldn't have been aware of Tanner's sighting.  There were any number of people in and around who could have spread the news - not excluding Robert Murat who aroused suspicion when snooping around the PJ investigation + of course, Murat was used by the PJ as interpreter for witness statements.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8701
Reputation : 3900
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Phoebe on 12.02.18 17:02

It seems to come down to two possible scenarios -
1)
The Smiths went on holiday to an apartment they co-owned in a development built by a fellow Drogheda man. One night, on their way home they passed a man carrying a sleeping little girl. They didn't think anything of it. It was a common enough sight in Luz. The next day they learned a little girl had been abducted. Soon the news came out that the abductor had been spotted in the act by one of the Tapas group. He was seen actually fleeing with the child from the 5A apartment 45-50 minutes before the Smiths encountered their man on the other side of town, going in the opposite direction. The police are concentrating on this lead. Martin Smith remembers his man and decides, on balance, that it means nothing. Is he really going to interrupt the police to tell them he say a man carrying a sleeping child over on the other side of town nearly an hour later? Common sense dictates that the abductor Jane has seen did not walk all around Luz for over three quarters of an hour. He concludes his sighting is unconnected and certainly not worth disturbing a foreign police force who don't speak his language and are up to their eyes seeking to find the child.
He returns to Ireland where, like elsewhere, everyone is closely following the story. Friends, neighbours and family back home know he was actually in Luz while all this happened and are agog to hear anything he might know about the case. That sets him thinking again about what he saw and whether he should have reported it. Then Murat is named by Jane as the abductor. Smith knows it was not Murat he saw and his conscience makes him decide to report what he saw. He goes to the Gardai and starts the ball rolling. later he and some of his family fly out to tell the P.J. their story at first hand.

2) The shadowy forces of the British secret service need someone to get Murat off the hook. Unable to find anyone in Luz willing, they contact a retired Irishman who used to work for a local food distribution company in Drogheda. He agrees to act undercover for them by recounting a false sighting. He further agrees to get his son and his 12 year old daughter to also lie to the police in their official statements in order to lend weight to the story. Then for some inexplicable reason, he points the finger at Gerry McCann being the man he saw making off with the child and continues to this day to reiterate this belief.

Edited to add the man the Smiths saw is described as having a short back and sides haircut. Jane's man has long hair at the back. Smith's man wears a blazer-style jacket and beige trousers. Jane's man wears a puffy anorak-style jacket and mustard/gold trousers.

Phoebe

Posts : 882
Reputation : 1029
Join date : 2017-03-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by polyenne on 12.02.18 17:16

Sorry Phoebe, but to me it comes down to any one of umpteen possible scenarios.

“The other side of town” is somewhat misleading too IMO

polyenne

Posts : 857
Reputation : 515
Join date : 2017-03-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Phoebe on 12.02.18 18:50

@ polyenne. In a small town like Luz I would regard a casual walking distance of ten minutes as being the other side of town but maybe that's just lazy me! I wouldn't want that to in any detract from the main point of my post.
 Much has been made of the "similarities" between the descriptions of Smithman and Tannerman. This seems to be the main basis for allegations that the Smith sighting is a lie and that they were given a description to match Tanner's. Meanwhile the very obvious differences are ignored or glossed over. IMO this is most misleading. The hair, jacket-styles and trouser colours in both sightings are all different. Jane describes Tannerman's shoes. The Smiths all say they did NOT notice his shoes. Let's think about it. If I were to say to someone - "X" says -
 "I saw a man, he had SHORT hair in typical, male, short-back- and-sides style. He wore CREAM or BEIGE trousers and a dark, BLAZER-STYLE jacket. I don't know what kind of shoes he wore. He was carrying a little girl" (ignore the carrying position to lessen 
distraction)
While "Y" says
"I saw a man. His hair was LONG at the back.  He wore GOLD/MUSTARD trousers and a PUFFA STYLE (padded anorak) jacket. He wore DARK SHOES, black or brown. He was carrying a child."

are X's and Y's descriptions a "word perfect" match? The answer is clearly "no". Did Peter Smith miss the memo since he didn't notice what the man was wearing at all? 
Goncalo Amaral remains convinced of two things. That the Smith sighting is genuine and that Jane invented her man and sent him off in the direct opposite direction to lessen its impact.

Phoebe

Posts : 882
Reputation : 1029
Join date : 2017-03-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Verdi on 12.02.18 21:20

Phoebe, I appreciate your desire to robustly defend your compatriots, although I don't pretend to understand why - good and bad in all walks of life in my experience. I'm English but I'm not blind to the fact that some fellow country-folk are rotten to the core.

Forgive my asking - do you personally know Martin Smith or any of his family? No problem if you decline to respond but it would help to explain your relentless defence in his honour, whilst flying in the face of all the evidence stacked-up against his veracity. Who knows, you might even be able to vouch for his testimony and thus halt any further doubt.

Just a thought.

____________________
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
avatar
Verdi
Moderator/Researcher

Posts : 8701
Reputation : 3900
Join date : 2015-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: POLL added: Have the McCanns really avoided all mention of the Smithman sighting?

Post by Phoebe on 12.02.18 23:08

@Verdi wrote:Phoebe, I appreciate your desire to robustly defend your compatriots, although I don't pretend to understand why -  good and bad in all walks of life in my experience.  I'm English but I'm not blind to the fact that some fellow country-folk are rotten to the core.

Forgive my asking - do you personally know Martin Smith or any of his family?  No problem if you decline to respond but it would help to explain your relentless defence in his honour, whilst flying in the face of all the evidence stacked-up against his veracity.  Who knows, you might even be able to vouch for his testimony and thus halt any further doubt.

Just a thought.
I was not aware I was "defending my "compatriots"". Why on earth would you infer/imply that? Am I now also part of some conspiracy theory, a plant to defend the McCanns?
 Gerry McCann is the only one of his Irish emigrant family not born in Donegal, yet I doubt I'll ever be accused of defending him nor Kate, Halligan, Gamble, Cat Baker etc. despite their links to Ireland.
 
 I think Madeleine McCann deserves the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth - not to have her disappearance  shoe-horned to fit any particular theory.

 In answer to your question no, I do not know Martin Smith nor any of his family, nor indeed anyone who hails from Drogheda (a town I have never had the pleasure of visiting)

Goncalo Amaral is Portuguese, yet he believes the Smiths are truthful. Perhaps Goncalo has Irish connections - that must be it!

You accuse me of "Flying in the face of all the "evidence" stacked up against the Smith's veracity". I see no EVIDENCE, just guesswork and supposition. In fact, what I have done is to point out how unlikely it is that MI5 or any other government agency would be so stuck for an alibi to get Murat off the hook that they had to resort to getting an Irish tourist and his children to do the job for them. These agencies were allegedly covering up for the McCanns lest the P.J. suspect them of causing their daughter's disappearance - yet they select a man who tells the P.J. that he believes he saw Gerry making off with the child at the time she disappeared. How likely is that?
I have also pointed out that there are significant differences in the men as described by the Smiths and Tanner. How does it serve Madeleine to ignore or deny that? This is about her, not anyone's desire for "their"
theory to be correct.
I don't care if the Smiths come from Ireland, Timbuktu or Mars. I do care that what might prove vital evidence is not misrepresented.
Finally, Verdi, for what it's worth, I am British! Born and schooled until my teen years in England where all my cousins and extended family still live. I also have  British passport. I just happen to live in lovely (if rainy) Ireland. So, nice try but you barked up the wrong tree there. It just  goes to prove that theories can be wrong!

Phoebe

Posts : 882
Reputation : 1029
Join date : 2017-03-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 6 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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