WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Latest News and Debate :: Debate Section - for purporting theories
Page 1 of 7 • Share
Page 1 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 
WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE WHEN THEY MADE THE CRIMEWATCH SHOW?
WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Tony Bennett 18.03.19 9:14
WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
Inevitably, the ‘Smithman’ sighting has been prominent in both the Netflix documentary and in Mark Saunokonoko’s podcasts.
For Operation Grange, Smithman was ‘the centre of our focus’. And you can’t get much more central than that.
For some, maybe many, on this forum, Smithman is Gerry McCann. Some on Twitter proclaim this as a ‘FACT’.
So, for Operation Grange, Smithman is the yet-to-be-found abductor.
For others, Smithman is Gerrry McCann.
For me, as is known, I consider Smithman a total fabrication, a view I share with U.S. former attorney, child psychologist and child sexual abuse expert, Wendy Murphy.
To try and tease out how we should view Smithman, I am setting up a poll asking this question:
What was in the minds of Operation Grange (and obviously in the minds of the most senior Metropolitan Police officers), when they agreed to commission, at huge expense, the BBC Crimewatch McCann Special that aired in October 2013?
They could have chosen, much earlier (they had the efits in mid-2011) to simply do a press conference holding up the Smithman images. Why, instead, did they spend so much effort on a misleading reconstruction and putting together an hour-long show?
Here I think are the main alternatives:
1 This was a genuine search for the missing abductor
2 They were sure/almost sure Gerry McCann was Smithman, so the Crimewatch show was to move towards arresting him
3 They knew that Smithman was fabricated and just wanted to use the programme to promote the abduction narrative.
4 Some other reason was in their minds.
I can’t see many other alternatives, so here’s the poll.
I'm voting (3)
Inevitably, the ‘Smithman’ sighting has been prominent in both the Netflix documentary and in Mark Saunokonoko’s podcasts.
For Operation Grange, Smithman was ‘the centre of our focus’. And you can’t get much more central than that.
For some, maybe many, on this forum, Smithman is Gerry McCann. Some on Twitter proclaim this as a ‘FACT’.
So, for Operation Grange, Smithman is the yet-to-be-found abductor.
For others, Smithman is Gerrry McCann.
For me, as is known, I consider Smithman a total fabrication, a view I share with U.S. former attorney, child psychologist and child sexual abuse expert, Wendy Murphy.
To try and tease out how we should view Smithman, I am setting up a poll asking this question:
What was in the minds of Operation Grange (and obviously in the minds of the most senior Metropolitan Police officers), when they agreed to commission, at huge expense, the BBC Crimewatch McCann Special that aired in October 2013?
They could have chosen, much earlier (they had the efits in mid-2011) to simply do a press conference holding up the Smithman images. Why, instead, did they spend so much effort on a misleading reconstruction and putting together an hour-long show?
Here I think are the main alternatives:
1 This was a genuine search for the missing abductor
2 They were sure/almost sure Gerry McCann was Smithman, so the Crimewatch show was to move towards arresting him
3 They knew that Smithman was fabricated and just wanted to use the programme to promote the abduction narrative.
4 Some other reason was in their minds.
I can’t see many other alternatives, so here’s the poll.
I'm voting (3)
____________________
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- Researcher
- Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Phoebe 18.03.19 11:08
Ah now Tony! How on earth can you possibly attempt to claim that the Netflix documentary series, all EIGHT HOURS of it gave prominence to the Smith sighting!!!
It was barely mentioned as a percentage of those eight hours, and on the first occasion when reference was made to it in the Netflix doc, anyone who watched no further would be mislead into believing that it could have been the man Tanner saw. Tanner's "sighting" wasn't debunked as a harmless tourist until a much later episode. How cunning!
When the Smith sighting was, ever so BRIEFLY, touched on again, it was to re hash the BBC lie that the Smiths had changed their minds about the man being Gerry, and to falsely state that it COULDN'T HAVE BEEN Gerry, since witnesses place him at the Tapas at the time of the sighting. Netflix conveniently omits the witness statements which claim Gerry was ABSENT for the table for half an hour and cuts the piece where Tanner, in the McCann-run reconstruction, slips up and mentions that Kate had been moaning because Gerry was gone a long time and they thought he had been watching "the footie".
Far from "Promoting the Smith sighting" Netflix failed to interview ANY of the Smiths, failed to even ask for a statement or comment from them and skipped over the whole affair as swiftly as possible.
If the Smiths were working for the McCanns (as you so often state) here was the PERFECT opportunity to use them. Netflix could have had the confirmation that the Smiths had changed their minds about it being Gerry live on camera through an interview with Martin or by directly reading a statement to that effect.
Do you really think the McCanns and their supporters would miss such an opportunity if they had the Smiths on board their team!!!!!!
It is clear that Netflix and BBC share the same agenda - to rescue Jane Tanner's reputation and to try to convey the false message that Gerry has independent alibis for the Smith sighting and that the Smiths have withdrawn that claim.
Edited to add, Wendy Murphy has NEVER said she doubted the Smiths. She said she wasn't buying the claim that there was an ABDUCTOR.
It was barely mentioned as a percentage of those eight hours, and on the first occasion when reference was made to it in the Netflix doc, anyone who watched no further would be mislead into believing that it could have been the man Tanner saw. Tanner's "sighting" wasn't debunked as a harmless tourist until a much later episode. How cunning!
When the Smith sighting was, ever so BRIEFLY, touched on again, it was to re hash the BBC lie that the Smiths had changed their minds about the man being Gerry, and to falsely state that it COULDN'T HAVE BEEN Gerry, since witnesses place him at the Tapas at the time of the sighting. Netflix conveniently omits the witness statements which claim Gerry was ABSENT for the table for half an hour and cuts the piece where Tanner, in the McCann-run reconstruction, slips up and mentions that Kate had been moaning because Gerry was gone a long time and they thought he had been watching "the footie".
Far from "Promoting the Smith sighting" Netflix failed to interview ANY of the Smiths, failed to even ask for a statement or comment from them and skipped over the whole affair as swiftly as possible.
If the Smiths were working for the McCanns (as you so often state) here was the PERFECT opportunity to use them. Netflix could have had the confirmation that the Smiths had changed their minds about it being Gerry live on camera through an interview with Martin or by directly reading a statement to that effect.
Do you really think the McCanns and their supporters would miss such an opportunity if they had the Smiths on board their team!!!!!!
It is clear that Netflix and BBC share the same agenda - to rescue Jane Tanner's reputation and to try to convey the false message that Gerry has independent alibis for the Smith sighting and that the Smiths have withdrawn that claim.
Edited to add, Wendy Murphy has NEVER said she doubted the Smiths. She said she wasn't buying the claim that there was an ABDUCTOR.
Phoebe- Posts : 1367
Activity : 3046
Likes received : 1659
Join date : 2017-03-01
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Tony Bennett 18.03.19 11:17
@ Phoebe Instead of rehashing your Smithman theory for the nth time, could you please have the courtesy to answer the question I posed, which was basically...Phoebe wrote:Ah now Tony! How on earth can you possibly attempt to claim that the Netflix documentary series, all EIGHT HOURS of it gave prominence to the Smith sighting!!!
It was barely mentioned as a percentage of those eight hours, and on the first occasion when reference was made to it in the Netflix doc, anyone who watched no further would be mislead into believing that it could have been the man Tanner saw. Tanner's "sighting" wasn't debunked as a harmless tourist until a much later episode. How cunning!
When the Smith sighting was, ever so BRIEFLY, touched on again, it was to re hash the BBC lie that the Smiths had changed their minds about the man being Gerry, and to falsely state that it COULDN'T HAVE BEEN Gerry, since witnesses place him at the Tapas at the time of the sighting. Netflix conveniently omits the witness statements which claim Gerry was ABSENT for the table for half an hour and cuts the piece where Tanner, in the McCann-run reconstruction, slips up and mentions that Kate had been moaning because Gerry was gone a long time and they thought he had been watching "the footie".
Far from "Promoting the Smith sighting" Netflix failed to interview ANY of the Smiths, failed to even ask for a statement or comment from them and skipped over the whole affair as swiftly as possible.
If the Smiths were working for the McCanns (as you so often state) here was the PERFECT opportunity to use them. Netflix could have had the confirmation that the Smiths had changed their minds about it being Gerry live on camera through an interview with Martin or by directly reading a statement to that effect.
Do you really think the McCanns and their supporters would miss such an opportunity if they had the Smiths on board their team!!!!!!
It is clear that Netflix and BBC share the same agenda - to rescue Jane Tanner's reputation and to try to convey the false message that Gerry has independent alibis for the Smith sighting and that the Smiths have withdrawn that claim.
Edited to add, Wendy Murphy has NEVER said she doubted the Smiths. She said she wasn't buying the claim that there was an ABDUCTOR.
...what were Operation Grange thinking...what was their aim, their motive...when they commissioned this Crimewatch Show?
I would appreciate your observations, thanks.
Also could you please answer the other questions I asked you the other day: who do you say the Smiths saw at 10.00pm Thursday 3 May?
My apologies in advance if you have answered this already and I didn't see it.
____________________
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- Researcher
- Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Verdi 18.03.19 11:46
Smithman was/is a handy tool for Operation Grange to continue their charade.
Did anything positive materialize after the e-fits were publicized during the Crimewatch 2013 special? No and that's an emphatic no!. Have either of the men been identified by a member of the public (apart from photoshop enthusiasts who like to morph mug shots)? No and that's an emphatic no!.
Smithman will never be found because he doesn't exist - at least not in the real world.
Unless of course Operation Grange can muster-up another dormant tourist who can testify being in the location at the time, wearing much the same clothing and carrying a sleeping child wearing only pyjamas as they did to exonerate Jane Tanner.
That wouldn't however satisfy their strategy, their long term agenda would it?
Did anything positive materialize after the e-fits were publicized during the Crimewatch 2013 special? No and that's an emphatic no!. Have either of the men been identified by a member of the public (apart from photoshop enthusiasts who like to morph mug shots)? No and that's an emphatic no!.
Smithman will never be found because he doesn't exist - at least not in the real world.
Unless of course Operation Grange can muster-up another dormant tourist who can testify being in the location at the time, wearing much the same clothing and carrying a sleeping child wearing only pyjamas as they did to exonerate Jane Tanner.
That wouldn't however satisfy their strategy, their long term agenda would it?
____________________
“ The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
Verdi- ex moderator
- Posts : 34684
Activity : 41936
Likes received : 5932
Join date : 2015-02-02
Location : Flossery
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Phoebe 18.03.19 11:54
Tony, in my post above I "rehashed" no "theory". Please point out from that post where I have done so!
I have answered the question re. "What were Grange thinking..."
Again, as you seem to have missed it - they were trying to rescue Tanner's reputation, shift the focus off her "sighting" and give the false impression that the Smiths had changed their mind about seeing Gerry that night.
Also once again as you seem to have missed that answer too. I believe the Smiths saw a man, as they described, carrying a girl, as they described at the time they said!
Now a question to you - why did neither the BBC nor Netflix proffer an interview with the Smiths nor feature any actual confirmation from them that had changed their minds about seeing Gerry McCann that night.
I have answered the question re. "What were Grange thinking..."
Again, as you seem to have missed it - they were trying to rescue Tanner's reputation, shift the focus off her "sighting" and give the false impression that the Smiths had changed their mind about seeing Gerry that night.
Also once again as you seem to have missed that answer too. I believe the Smiths saw a man, as they described, carrying a girl, as they described at the time they said!
Now a question to you - why did neither the BBC nor Netflix proffer an interview with the Smiths nor feature any actual confirmation from them that had changed their minds about seeing Gerry McCann that night.
Phoebe- Posts : 1367
Activity : 3046
Likes received : 1659
Join date : 2017-03-01
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Guest 18.03.19 12:03
There's evidence that the Smith's maintain they / he saw Gerry. This video of Gemma O'Doherty uploaded less than 2 weeks ago (first 12 mins) explains she has spoken to them direct, something you nor anyone else here has done.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Guest- Guest
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Tony Bennett 18.03.19 12:26
You said that Netflix and the BBC "share the same agenda - to rescue Jane Tanner's reputation and to try to convey the false message that Gerry has independent alibis for the Smith sighting and that the Smiths have withdrawn that claim".Phoebe wrote:I have answered the question re. "What were Grange thinking..."
Again, as you seem to have missed it - they were trying to rescue Tanner's reputation, shift the focus off her "sighting" and give the false impression that the Smiths had changed their mind about seeing Gerry that night.
I believe the Smiths saw a man, as they described, carrying a girl, as they described at the time they said!
Now a question to you - why did neither the BBC nor Netflix proffer an interview with the Smiths nor feature any actual confirmation from them that had changed their minds about seeing Gerry McCann that night.
You mentioned Netflix and the BBC but my question was very specific - what was in the mind of Operation Grange.
On the basis of your reply, you must believe that:
DCI Redwood deliberately invented Crecheman (to help Jane Tanner)
DCI Redwood deliberately tried to place Gerry McCann at the Ocean Club when he said he wasn't, and
DCI Redwood deliberately lied in claiming that the Smiths had withdrawn their claim.
This virtually amounts to DCI Redwood saying that Gerry did it, doesn't it. You allege basically that Gerry McCann had the OPPORTUNITY to run off with Madeleine's body AND that Smithman is right in being nearly sure he saw Gerry carrying Madeleine.
You wrote this: "I believe the Smiths saw a man, as they described, carrying a girl, as they described at the time they said!"
I asked you politely to clarify this but you didn't.
But you have now. You have made it very clear by your reply that in your opinion Gerry McCann = Smithman, and that the child was Madeleine. I disagree, of course.
You also wrote: "Now a question to you - why did neither the BBC nor Netflix proffer an interview with the Smiths nor feature any actual confirmation from them that had changed their minds about seeing Gerry McCann that night?"
ANSWER: Following the Salsalito conference between the lawyered-up McCann Team and the lawyered up Robert Murat, the two camps settled their fight - which I have documented extensively and we all know about anyway. They agreed to co-operate. This Martin Smith became free to co-operate with the McCanns and their investigators, as he plainly has done ever since. By now he is almost certainly is an intelligence asset who doesn't speak unless the intelligence services allow him to. He has served the cause of the McCanns and Operation Grange amazingly well.
____________________
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- Researcher
- Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Tony Bennett 18.03.19 12:37
There is a very very simple answer to this riddle.HKP wrote:There's evidence that the Smith's maintain they / he saw Gerry. This video of Gemma O'Doherty uploaded less than 2 weeks ago (first 12 mins) explains she has spoken to them direct, something you nor anyone else here has done.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
To repeat.
It is blindingly obvious that Martin Smith has supported the McCann Team (and latterly Operation Grange) for the past 11 years - beginning in December 2007 and right up to the present. I have repeatedly given Chapter and Verse on CMOMM and no-one has denied it.
All that Martin Smith is saying is that he has never withdrawn his claim that Smithman = Gerry McCann.
What I suggest he means by that is that he has never formally withdrawn his claim, i.e. he has never signed a formal retraction.
He (and those behind him) are thus able to keep both things going at the same time:
1 Helping the McCann Team (and Operation Grange) as best as he can for the past 11 years, and
2 Encouraging the ever-diminishing band of people who still think he really saw Gerry McCann, by the elegant and simple device of telling Gemma O'Doherty: "I've never actually signed a formal withdrawal".
____________________
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- Researcher
- Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Phoebe 18.03.19 13:00
@ Tony Bennett. A) you have not attempted to answer my question, so I'll repeat it -
Why, if the Smiths are working for or supporting the McCanns have we never seen an interview with or statement from them in which they clarify their retraction of their belief that the man they saw that night was Gerry. An answer would be much appreciated.
B) I have clearly stated that I believe the Smiths saw a man, as they describe, carrying a child as they describe, at the time they said they saw him. It's astonishing that you claim to know who I believe it was since I haven't made up my own mind (and I have repeatedly said this)
C) Martin Smith has never actually withdrawn his statement re. it being Gerry he saw, ANYWHERE!!!!!! Not to the police, not by issuing a public statement, nor can the BBC or Netlfix produce any such withdrawal statement or interview.
In fact he told Gemma O'Doherty he stands by it and allowed this to be published by "Village" - ( an Irish publication which his friends and family will have read and spoken about with him) Village has never been asked to retract that claim. He also told her he contacted the BBC to protest over their misinformation.
In fact, "it is blindingly obvious" that Martin Smith is no asset to Team McCann.
Neither you nor anyone else other than those involved can know what was discussed between the Murat and McCanns' legal teams in Salisito or anywhere else for that matter. That is your theory, not a fact.
Why, if the Smiths are working for or supporting the McCanns have we never seen an interview with or statement from them in which they clarify their retraction of their belief that the man they saw that night was Gerry. An answer would be much appreciated.
B) I have clearly stated that I believe the Smiths saw a man, as they describe, carrying a child as they describe, at the time they said they saw him. It's astonishing that you claim to know who I believe it was since I haven't made up my own mind (and I have repeatedly said this)
C) Martin Smith has never actually withdrawn his statement re. it being Gerry he saw, ANYWHERE!!!!!! Not to the police, not by issuing a public statement, nor can the BBC or Netlfix produce any such withdrawal statement or interview.
In fact he told Gemma O'Doherty he stands by it and allowed this to be published by "Village" - ( an Irish publication which his friends and family will have read and spoken about with him) Village has never been asked to retract that claim. He also told her he contacted the BBC to protest over their misinformation.
In fact, "it is blindingly obvious" that Martin Smith is no asset to Team McCann.
Neither you nor anyone else other than those involved can know what was discussed between the Murat and McCanns' legal teams in Salisito or anywhere else for that matter. That is your theory, not a fact.
Phoebe- Posts : 1367
Activity : 3046
Likes received : 1659
Join date : 2017-03-01
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Guest 18.03.19 13:10
The key words from your post are ' what I suggest he means '. In other words that's a complete guess.Tony Bennett wrote:There is a very very simple answer to this riddle.HKP wrote:There's evidence that the Smith's maintain they / he saw Gerry. This video of Gemma O'Doherty uploaded less than 2 weeks ago (first 12 mins) explains she has spoken to them direct, something you nor anyone else here has done.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
To repeat.
It is blindingly obvious that Martin Smith has supported the McCann Team (and latterly Operation Grange) for the past 11 years - beginning in December 2007 and right up to the present. I have repeatedly given Chapter and Verse on CMOMM and no-one has denied it.
All that Martin Smith is saying is that he has never withdrawn his claim that Smithman = Gerry McCann.
What I suggest he means by that is that he has never formally withdrawn his claim, i.e. he has never signed a formal retraction.
He (and those behind him) are thus able to keep both things going at the same time:
1 Helping the McCann Team (and Operation Grange) as best as he can for the past 11 years, and
2 Encouraging the ever-diminishing band of people who still think he really saw Gerry McCann, by the elegant and simple device of telling Gemma O'Doherty: "I've never actually signed a formal withdrawal".
What Gemma States is when asked if he'd withdrawn his statement at all he (MS) says absolutely not!
When asked if he has ever changed his mind "never" is the response.
So we have your non evidence against the actual (although second hand) evidence
Guest- Guest
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Phoebe 18.03.19 13:45
just to clarify that this was not a mere case of Smith not formally withdrawing his statement that he believed the man he saw was Gerry McCann-
Snipped form the "Village" article by Gemma O.D. "Did the BBC bend the truth"
"In recent weeks, I have spoken to Martin Smith at his home in Drogheda. He told me he continues to stand by everything he said to police in 2007. At no point did he withdraw his statement or change his mind about the sighting. He is frustrated by media claims that he now says he was mistaken; and remains “60-80 per cent” convinced that the man he saw that night was Gerry McCann"
Snipped form the "Village" article by Gemma O.D. "Did the BBC bend the truth"
"In recent weeks, I have spoken to Martin Smith at his home in Drogheda. He told me he continues to stand by everything he said to police in 2007. At no point did he withdraw his statement or change his mind about the sighting. He is frustrated by media claims that he now says he was mistaken; and remains “60-80 per cent” convinced that the man he saw that night was Gerry McCann"
Phoebe- Posts : 1367
Activity : 3046
Likes received : 1659
Join date : 2017-03-01
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Verdi 18.03.19 14:20
As I've said in the past, what a pity Gemma O'Doherty didn't have the presence of mind to record or video her brief meeting with Martin Smith.
It would add so much more clout - as it stands it is only hearsay. Like so much connected with the Smith family's, it requires tangible verification - preferably from an official source.
It would add so much more clout - as it stands it is only hearsay. Like so much connected with the Smith family's, it requires tangible verification - preferably from an official source.
____________________
“ The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
Verdi- ex moderator
- Posts : 34684
Activity : 41936
Likes received : 5932
Join date : 2015-02-02
Location : Flossery
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Guest 18.03.19 14:35
Where is the tangible verification- preferably from an official source, that Martin Smith withdrew his statement / no longer has the same point of view? It's a futile argument.Verdi wrote:As I've said in the past, what a pity Gemma O'Doherty didn't have the presence of mind to record or video her brief meeting with Martin Smith.
It would add so much more clout - as it stands it is only hearsay. Like so much connected with the Smith family's, it requires tangible verification - preferably from an official source.
Guest- Guest
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Verdi 18.03.19 14:43
Crimewatch 2013 Madeleine McCann Special - introduction transcript
Kirsty Young: Live for the next hour tonight the case that’s fascinated the world but what really happened to Madeleine McCann?
With exclusive access to Scotland Yard’s investigation we can now reveal the most detailed understanding of what took place that night in Portugal.
Andy Redwood: Things that have not been quite as significant or received quite the same degree of attention are now the centre of our focus. The e-fits are clear and I’d ask the public to look very carefully at them.
We’ll explain why the images are so critical and debunk the existing theories.
We are almost certain now that this sighting is not the abductor.
Kirsty Young: Live for the next hour tonight the case that’s fascinated the world but what really happened to Madeleine McCann?
With exclusive access to Scotland Yard’s investigation we can now reveal the most detailed understanding of what took place that night in Portugal.
Andy Redwood: Things that have not been quite as significant or received quite the same degree of attention are now the centre of our focus. The e-fits are clear and I’d ask the public to look very carefully at them.
We’ll explain why the images are so critical and debunk the existing theories.
We are almost certain now that this sighting is not the abductor.
____________________
“ The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
Verdi- ex moderator
- Posts : 34684
Activity : 41936
Likes received : 5932
Join date : 2015-02-02
Location : Flossery
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by willowthewisp 18.03.19 15:08
Hi Verdi,Mr Bennett,Phoebe,HKP,etc-Smithman/person sighting 3 May 2007,Portugal.Verdi wrote:As I've said in the past, what a pity Gemma O'Doherty didn't have the presence of mind to record or video her brief meeting with Martin Smith.
It would add so much more clout - as it stands it is only hearsay. Like so much connected with the Smith family's, it requires tangible verification - preferably from an official source.
The main thrust should be to expose the fabrication of Crime Watch October 2013, Operation Grange, Mr J Totman, Jane Tanner, Smith family sighting on above date. If the disappearance of Madeleine McCann ever proceeds to Criminal charges, the Smith Family have made statements and are prepared to give evidence in a Court appearance?
If the Metropolitan Police service have tried to fabricate programmes to digest from a Police Investigation, remit, Abduction, they should face charges of "Perverting a course of Justice", DCI Andy Redwood,DCS Hamish Campbell, DCI Simon Foy, Mark Rowley for thr timme being!
Jane Tanner states, "Gerry was gone a long time", Kate assumes, Gerry is watching Football in the Apartment,(whilst kids are asleep?), this then leads to Jez Wilken's waltz?
So, the Tapas 7/9 do know more than they are letting the public know,aka 1485 DCI Messahi,Doctor Payne, wrong forum to unveil pertinent questions, Leicestershire Police April 2008.
This is a "Cover Up" by the UK Government,MI5/6 and they reveal why?
Crime Watch Netflix,Operation Grange have spent over 60-80 million pounds to divert,obfuscate evidence for over twelve Years,doesn't that smark that something has been Covered UP,Why!
To protect Tapas 7/9, Kate, Gerry or the UK Government,"National security" 100 yr D-notice!
willowthewisp- Posts : 3392
Activity : 4912
Likes received : 1160
Join date : 2015-05-07
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Verdi 18.03.19 15:14
Operation Grange: OK Mr Smith, mind if I call you Martin - right that's good . So Martin, you know we've asked you here today as an important witness to help with the production of an e-fit of the man you and your family witnessed walking the streets of Luz at approximately 10:00pm on the night of 3rd May 2007. Are you alright with that?
M Smith: Oh yes, anything I can do to help the investigation.
Operation Grange: Good, that's fine. If we can start with a description, I understand you are 60/80% sure of the identity of the man you witnessed - can you describe the person for me so we can work on the e-fit?
Martin Smith: Yes it's this man ....
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Operation Grange: Aha thanks that's great, we'll work on that now - coffee?
OK so here we are again. Can you confirm this to be an accurate likeness to the person you witnessed based on your description..
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Martin Smith: Yes that's him, it's spot on!
Operation Grange: Which one?
Martin Smith: Yes - both!
M Smith: Oh yes, anything I can do to help the investigation.
Operation Grange: Good, that's fine. If we can start with a description, I understand you are 60/80% sure of the identity of the man you witnessed - can you describe the person for me so we can work on the e-fit?
Martin Smith: Yes it's this man ....
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Operation Grange: Aha thanks that's great, we'll work on that now - coffee?
OK so here we are again. Can you confirm this to be an accurate likeness to the person you witnessed based on your description..
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Martin Smith: Yes that's him, it's spot on!
Operation Grange: Which one?
Martin Smith: Yes - both!
____________________
“ The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
Verdi- ex moderator
- Posts : 34684
Activity : 41936
Likes received : 5932
Join date : 2015-02-02
Location : Flossery
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Phoebe 18.03.19 15:36
The Smiths e-fit is is of one man don't try to deflect with nonsense. I still await an answer to my question. So I'll rephrase it -
It is a fact that one of the most, damning allegations which suggest the McCanns played a role in their child's disappearance comes in the form of Martin Smith's assertion that both he and his wife believe the man they saw carrying a Madeleine lookalike child that night was her own father, Gerry McCann. If the Smiths are aboard team McCann why have they not been asked by team McCann to publicly retract this opinion.
It is a fact that one of the most, damning allegations which suggest the McCanns played a role in their child's disappearance comes in the form of Martin Smith's assertion that both he and his wife believe the man they saw carrying a Madeleine lookalike child that night was her own father, Gerry McCann. If the Smiths are aboard team McCann why have they not been asked by team McCann to publicly retract this opinion.
Phoebe- Posts : 1367
Activity : 3046
Likes received : 1659
Join date : 2017-03-01
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Guest 18.03.19 15:58
To answer the question put on this thread (rather than stupid jokes) I can't quite remember the full content (I'm not going to sit through it again!) however i'lI put this out there for thoughts.
Redwood or Rowley (can't quite remember, may not even have been crimewatch) stated it was possible that Maddie did in fact die in the apartment, possibly at the hands of the abductor. The definition of abduction is to remove illegally (usually with force), if you remove a dead body from a crime scene then it's an illegal removal hence abduction. Which actually means she could have been abducted by, let's just say someone closer to home.
I don't believe it myself however it's s thought......
Redwood or Rowley (can't quite remember, may not even have been crimewatch) stated it was possible that Maddie did in fact die in the apartment, possibly at the hands of the abductor. The definition of abduction is to remove illegally (usually with force), if you remove a dead body from a crime scene then it's an illegal removal hence abduction. Which actually means she could have been abducted by, let's just say someone closer to home.
I don't believe it myself however it's s thought......
Guest- Guest
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by worriedmum 18.03.19 15:59
I'm trying to work out why you would make 'fabricated ' e-fits look anything like the person you are trying to exclude as a suspect...Verdi wrote:Smithman was/is a handy tool for Operation Grange to continue their charade.
Did anything positive materialize after the e-fits were publicized during the Crimewatch 2013 special? No and that's an emphatic no!. Have either of the men been identified by a member of the public (apart from photoshop enthusiasts who like to morph mug shots)? No and that's an emphatic no!.
Smithman will never be found because he doesn't exist - at least not in the real world.
Unless of course Operation Grange can muster-up another dormant tourist who can testify being in the location at the time, wearing much the same clothing and carrying a sleeping child wearing only pyjamas as they did to exonerate Jane Tanner.
That wouldn't however satisfy their strategy, their long term agenda would it?
worriedmum- Posts : 2062
Activity : 2819
Likes received : 583
Join date : 2012-01-17
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Guest 18.03.19 16:17
It has to be said, if Martin Smith was convinced it was Gerry McCann when asked to help with an e-fit drawing surely he'd muster up a photo of Gerry (from the web?) and say draw exactly this guy!
Guest- Guest
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by sar 18.03.19 17:46
JT says GM was missing for a while. His alibi are the tapas group, he is positively ID'd to police, to hang with percentages, JT starts crying during reconstruction under pressure from guess who??? M Smith & families statements are a matter of record, for ever. If I were going to concoct a story to the police no less, I'd leave a child out of it. JT's sighting of potential suspect (Now years later Totman) is destroyed by Operation strange, say what you want it does not LOOK good.
sar- Posts : 1335
Activity : 1680
Likes received : 341
Join date : 2013-09-11
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Guest 18.03.19 18:30
It's hard to believe that anyone would drag their 12 year old daughter (amongst other members of your family) into a fabricated sighting to help out a 'friend' (or anyone else for that matter). The Smith's saw somebody and decided to say what they sawsar wrote:JT says GM was missing for a while. His alibi are the tapas group, he is positively ID'd to police, to hang with percentages, JT starts crying during reconstruction under pressure from guess who??? M Smith & families statements are a matter of record, for ever. If I were going to concoct a story to the police no less, I'd leave a child out of it. JT's sighting of potential suspect (Now years later Totman) is destroyed by Operation strange, say what you want it does not LOOK good.
Guest- Guest
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by coati mundi 18.03.19 23:30
I should set out my stall out from the beginning, so that there is no mistake about where I am coming from. I did not believe the McCann abduction narrative as soon as I first heard it.
I do not contribute to this forum very often, though I do follow it and read it read it.
I am, however, increasingly concerned about the contributions of certain people on this forum and some of the topics aired here. I see no place on a forum like this, that is concerned about the apparently staged abduction of a child, and the possible involvement in that of her parents, for things like conspiracy theories about the murder of MP Jo Cox, or questions about how you voted about Brexit.
I am concerned about some of the contributions of Tony Bennet and the contributor Verdi. Each of these posters seem to me to want to undermine evidence, such as the Smith sighting and the Fenn statement in order to support a frankly difficult to sustain theory that Madeleine McCann was gone days before her disappearance.
And don't say I haven't looked at the evidence. I frequently bore my less interested friends with details I have learned from this forum.
I feel that some posts, in particular from TB and Verdi seem to cast doubt on the McCann's involvement. They question anything that might suggest that whatever happened took place at a later time in the week. I could accept from the evidence that it may have happened a day before, but find it hard to believe that there was a concerted cover-up for three days or more.
The other thing is that people jump to assume that the whole thing was part of a government/establishment cover up. The McCanns were and are media savvy. The faked abduction happened at a time when the government and powers that be were in thrall to the media. Once it became a media event, all sorts of people had no option but to support the narrative that was out in the media and to get on the bandwagon. To do otherwise risked the wrath of certain parts of the media that had found a goldenn goose.
I would like to say that I respect the way that Tony Bennet has put himself on the line by challenging the McCann's narrative. I don't know who Verdi might be, but I do have regard for his/her tenacity. I am just not sure of their conclusions. I do, however, accept that their conclusions are much nearer to the truth than those of the McCanns.
All IMO and with respect to the members of the forum.
I do not contribute to this forum very often, though I do follow it and read it read it.
I am, however, increasingly concerned about the contributions of certain people on this forum and some of the topics aired here. I see no place on a forum like this, that is concerned about the apparently staged abduction of a child, and the possible involvement in that of her parents, for things like conspiracy theories about the murder of MP Jo Cox, or questions about how you voted about Brexit.
I am concerned about some of the contributions of Tony Bennet and the contributor Verdi. Each of these posters seem to me to want to undermine evidence, such as the Smith sighting and the Fenn statement in order to support a frankly difficult to sustain theory that Madeleine McCann was gone days before her disappearance.
And don't say I haven't looked at the evidence. I frequently bore my less interested friends with details I have learned from this forum.
I feel that some posts, in particular from TB and Verdi seem to cast doubt on the McCann's involvement. They question anything that might suggest that whatever happened took place at a later time in the week. I could accept from the evidence that it may have happened a day before, but find it hard to believe that there was a concerted cover-up for three days or more.
The other thing is that people jump to assume that the whole thing was part of a government/establishment cover up. The McCanns were and are media savvy. The faked abduction happened at a time when the government and powers that be were in thrall to the media. Once it became a media event, all sorts of people had no option but to support the narrative that was out in the media and to get on the bandwagon. To do otherwise risked the wrath of certain parts of the media that had found a goldenn goose.
I would like to say that I respect the way that Tony Bennet has put himself on the line by challenging the McCann's narrative. I don't know who Verdi might be, but I do have regard for his/her tenacity. I am just not sure of their conclusions. I do, however, accept that their conclusions are much nearer to the truth than those of the McCanns.
All IMO and with respect to the members of the forum.
____________________
Sube los manos! Hands up! - Coati Mundi
coati mundi- Posts : 133
Activity : 237
Likes received : 90
Join date : 2014-02-22
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Verdi 19.03.19 1:06
coati mundi wrote:1) I feel that some posts, in particular from TB and Verdi seem to cast doubt on the McCann's involvement.
2) I would like to say that I respect the way that Tony Bennet has put himself on the line by challenging the McCann's narrative. I don't know who Verdi might be, but I do have regard for his/her tenacity. I am just not sure of their conclusions. I do, however, accept that their conclusions are much nearer to the truth than those of the McCanns.
It's good to see you posting again coati mundi and I thank you for your observations. Sorry to read you are not happy with the forum's direction.
Forgive me, it's late in the day and I might be misunderstanding your point - doesn't comment 1 contradict comment 2?
That aside, let me assure you I read and see everything and draw my own conclusions. I agree with some points and I disagree with some points made, no matter who is the commentator. The subject matter is always the focal point not the poster.
If you think for one second that I'm a McCann sympathizer, clearly you have not been following the narrative.
You see the forum as no place for particular topics - well, I can only say that's the very purpose of the forum. To uncover the truth about the mystery of Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
My good wishes to you.
____________________
“ The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made" - Groucho Marx
Verdi- ex moderator
- Posts : 34684
Activity : 41936
Likes received : 5932
Join date : 2015-02-02
Location : Flossery
Re: WHAT WAS IN THE MIND OF OPERATION GRANGE, WHEN THEY SET ABOUT PREPARING THE CRIMEWATCH PROGRAMME?
by Tony Bennett 19.03.19 17:39
Any investigator, official or amateur, weighs up evidence, whether forensic, or in witness statements.coati mundi wrote:I am concerned about some of the contributions of Tony Bennett and the contributor Verdi. Each of these posters seem to me to want to undermine evidence, such as the Smith sighting and the Fenn statement in order to support a frankly difficult to sustain theory that Madeleine McCann was gone days before her disappearance.
SNIPPED
We have all done that in this case. Many better than me have analysed statements e.g. by the McCanns and the Tapas 7 and found them to be, in part, full of holes, misleading, contradictory etc. - and full of changes of story.
It may appear that apart from them, every other witness must be treated as genuine, independent, and with perfect recollection of events. But we know this is not the case. So we probe every witness, test every statement if we can.
One problem about the Smith statements is that Martin Smith has a prior relationship with the initial suspect in this case, Robert Murat. We do not know the extent of that relationship. There is unquestionably a degree of ambiguity and evasiveness about the extent of the relationship. We therefore should probe it more deeply. As I have done.
Then @ coati mundi there is the nature of the evidence that the Smiths give.
Three of them say they saw a man carrying a child. The description by them is remarkably similar to two other descriptions given days earlier, namely those of Tannerman and Sagresman. It was dark, the street lighting was weak, they only saw him for a few seconds at the most, and all three said they'd never recognise him again if they saw him
One of them, only one of them, Martin Smith, says he is sure the man is not Robert Murat, whom he apparently knows well enough to reocgnise, even in the circumstances referred to above.
Four months later, one of them, and only one of them, Martin Smith, says the way the man walked and carried his child, as seen in a short television clip, makes him 60% to 80% confident the man he saw was Gerry McCann.
Three months after that, he unquestioningly begins to help the very man who he's identified as the probably abductor of Madeleine McCann by:
* talking to his agent Brain Kennedy
* talking to his agent Henri Exton (whom he's employed along with rogue Kevin Halligen) and then
* drawing up two different efits of a man to help the McCanns identify a stranger abductor.
To even hint that this sequence of events is reliable evidence that the Smiths saw Gerry McCann that night is - forgive me - near to madness.
One final note. I do not begin with a theory and then fit everything into it. I have patiently studied the Smiths' evidence. Mrs Fenn's strange evidence. The Last Photo evidence. The Make-Up Photo. Lizzy Hideo's observations on the lack of credible, independent Maddie sightings after Sunday. The hurried, insistent booking of the Tapas restaurant late on Sunday night. And so on.
And THEN I form an overall view.
And I also take into account that Operation Grange, the BBC and the McCanns are all very excited about and focused on this sighting and believe it to be credible.
Like yourself
____________________
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- Researcher
- Posts : 16906
Activity : 24770
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 76
Location : Shropshire
Page 1 of 7 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Similar topics» FOI Act request about meetings between staff of Operation Grange and BBC Crimewatch - REFUSED
» EXCLUSIVE PICTURE OF PRODUCTION MEETING BETWEEN "CRIMEWATCH" STAFF AND "OPERATION GRANGE" DETECTIVES!
» OPERATION GRANGE - Independent 4/10/13 SY Review Team says there's now *41* persons of interest, and they're trying with the help of Interpol to track mobile 'phones linked to 31 countries worldwide... *PLUS* A new Crimewatch TV appeal in FOUR countries
» Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"
» New HOME OFFICE FOIAct request, 24 Apr 2018: (A) Procedures for approving grants to Operation Grange (B) Costs to Portugal of helping Operation Grange
» EXCLUSIVE PICTURE OF PRODUCTION MEETING BETWEEN "CRIMEWATCH" STAFF AND "OPERATION GRANGE" DETECTIVES!
» OPERATION GRANGE - Independent 4/10/13 SY Review Team says there's now *41* persons of interest, and they're trying with the help of Interpol to track mobile 'phones linked to 31 countries worldwide... *PLUS* A new Crimewatch TV appeal in FOUR countries
» Met Police: "It would take up too much time to find out how many Operation Grange staff have had trips abroad on Operation Grange work, and for how long they were away"
» New HOME OFFICE FOIAct request, 24 Apr 2018: (A) Procedures for approving grants to Operation Grange (B) Costs to Portugal of helping Operation Grange
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Latest News and Debate :: Debate Section - for purporting theories
Page 1 of 7
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
