Re: Smithman theory

by **crusader** 18.05.24 17:10

It showed 14 bottles of wine on the 3rd but this was for all the Mark Warner guests in the tapas restaurant not just the McCann's.
Totalled up at the end of dinner service.

by Paddingtom 18.05.24 17:37

it would seem they would have been very "relaxed"......

Silentscope, I think weve got our wires crossed......the theory Im going for is that she died several days earlier and the "abduction" was staged for the benefit of cctv. Jane would say she saw the abductor heading to the beach ....to get a boat to Sagres......and when the police seizedthe beach route cctv thenre would be the abductor.......then Sagresman turns up and all efforts are transfered out of PDL to Sagres.......

But it went wrong....Gerry was seen by the smiths and they had to abandon the plan to avoid the police seeing the cctv.....so jane said he went in the opposite diectioon......apparently Control Risks did a report on what they had established from thir (phoney) investigations and their conclusion was that the abductor would have had a car waiting justaround the corner from 5A to make hisn escape...presumbaly to Sagres.....

by **crusader** 18.05.24 18:06

I'm waiting to see what the foreign detective has to say about the hidden cameras he put up.

by **Silentscope** 18.05.24 19:23

Paddingtom wrote:it would seem they would have been very "relaxed"......

Silentscope, I think weve got our wires crossed......the theory Im going for is that she died several days earlier and the "abduction" was staged for the benefit of cctv. Jane would say she saw the abductor heading to the beach ....to get a boat to Sagres......and when the police seizedthe beach route cctv thenre would be the abductor.......then Sagresman turns up and all efforts are transfered out of PDL to Sagres.......

But it went wrong....Gerry was seen by the smiths and they had to abandon the plan to avoid the police seeing the cctv.....so jane said he went in the opposite diectioon......apparently Control Risks did a report on what they had established from thir (phoney) investigations and their conclusion was that the abductor would have had a car waiting justaround the corner from 5A to make hisn escape...presumbaly to Sagres.....

Sorry Paddington, I am not convinced that your Theory holds enough water.

There is no indication that the Tapas crew knew that the CCTV was even there.
If they did know, why not just avoid it?
There is indication of Gerry planning the whole Abduction and Trampling of the Scene thing from his Bedtime Stories, but no evidence that any original plan they concocted together was ever altered.

by Cake Lover 18.05.24 19:46

Perhaps after Madeleine had died, they carried out a recce to locate cctv cameras? They could have scouted around in groups of two or three, in specified areas?

by **Silentscope** 18.05.24 20:01

I doubt if they did anything outside of normal, or else someone might have noticed it.

The open Luggage door on the hired Renault Scenic being a case in point.

by **crusader** 18.05.24 20:21

Someone who's name escapes me at the moment, told the police she saw car lights on the Rocha Negra the night Madeleine was missing, she said it was really unusual.
The police dismissed it as probably being a police vehicle.

by Paddingtom 19.05.24 7:44

Silentscope wrote:
Paddingtom wrote:it would seem they would have been very "relaxed"......

Silentscope, I think weve got our wires crossed......the theory Im going for is that she died several days earlier and the "abduction" was staged for the benefit of cctv. Jane would say she saw the abductor heading to the beach ....to get a boat to Sagres......and when the police seizedthe beach route cctv thenre would be the abductor.......then Sagresman turns up and all efforts are transfered out of PDL to Sagres.......

But it went wrong....Gerry was seen by the smiths and they had to abandon the plan to avoid the police seeing the cctv.....so jane said he went in the opposite diectioon......apparently Control Risks did a report on what they had established from thir (phoney) investigations and their conclusion was that the abductor would have had a car waiting justaround the corner from 5A to make hisn escape...presumbaly to Sagres.....

Sorry Paddington, I am not convinced that your Theory holds enough water.

There is no indication that the Tapas crew knew that the CCTV was even there.
If they did know, why not just avoid it?
There is indication of Gerry planning the whole Abduction and Trampling of the Scene thing from his Bedtime Stories, but no evidence that any original plan they concocted together was ever altered.

Hi Silentscope,

I agree with Cake Lover, they couls well have been looking around for several days before the "event"...and besides, we know there were "helpers" already in PDL so it could have been them looking....

My whole theory relies on them Wanting to be seen by CCTV They were staging an abduction..using Ella or Amelie....theyres no point in doing that unless its seen!!!......But people are too unpridictable, so they didnt want to be seen by people...they wanted to be seen by CCTV and CCTV alone. I agree we dont know exactly what they had planned in advance, but their 2 attemps at timlines of them checking on thee kids is an indication that some planning was being done.....probaly by the "helpers"

Obviouslty being seen by the Smith scuppered their plans and now, the last thing they wanted was for the police to see the cctv that had gerry on it,,,so at that point they got Tannerman to go in the opposite direction.

by Paddingtom 19.05.24 8:02

crusader wrote:That makes sense, any explanation as to why Gerry and Jez didn't back her story up when she said she walked past them? That would have made her story a lot more believable.
I can understand Jez saying he didn't see her, but why Gerry?

Hi Crusader

Ive been pondering this and all I can come up with is this. Jane obviously wasnt there, She said she was because she needed to have seen Tannerman at that time. Obviously Jez wasnt in on it and knew he hadnt seen Jane, so said so. Gerry was supposed to back Jane up and say she was there...but what would it have looked like to Jez?....they were standing a few inches apart and one of them says he sees someone but the other cant see them...I belive Gerry said he didnt see her because it might have made Jez very suspicious and start to ask questions....better to agree with Jez and hooefullt shut it down........the problem obviously is that Gerry hadnt given Jane the alibi she needed...but he could only agree with one of them and chose Jez. Everything they did and said was manipulated and covered, so Janes presence there was added to the list of thing so sow confusion about....

thats the best I can do.....

by Paddingtom 19.05.24 8:16

crusader wrote:Someone who's name escapes me at the moment, told the police she saw car lights on the Rocha Negra the night Madeleine was missing, she said it was really unusual.
The police dismissed it as probably being a police vehicle.

Hi Crusader,

do you know which police?....if it was british police then Rocha Negra would be an interesting lead.....if it was Portugese police then it probably was a police vehicle and nothing of interest...

Also, wouldnt water have been a better choice....cant help thinking burial is far too high a risk of being found

by **crusader** 19.05.24 8:26

Hi Paddingtom, I'm sure it was the Portuguese police the person reported it to, I'm still trying to find who it was that reported it.
I didn't know you could get a vehicle up Rocha Negra.
I'm thinking along the same lines as you about Tanner walking past Gerry and Jez, she admits she was wearing flip flops that night and we all know they make a flapping sound when walking, the street was very narrow.
There is no way she would have been able to walk past Gerry and Jez unseen, if they didn't see her they would have heard her flip flopping about.
So Gerry must have told her to say she saw him and Jez talking at that time.

by **Silentscope** 19.05.24 8:27

The only explanation that makes sense to me is that Jane T left the OC and was walking toward where Jez and Gerry were stood talking.

The original plan was that Gerry would have been back at the Table by then, but Jez W held Gerry up.

So not wanting to be seen by Jez she turned left down the Pathway behind the Blocks, and did not go to the Junction past Gerry and Jez as previously planned.

That is why no one saw her, and she told the PJ she walked past the two men talking, because that was what she had been told to tell the PJ.

Jez Wilkins was just a totally innocent disruption.

by **crusader** 19.05.24 8:32

I'm thinking they all used the patio doors to their apartments to check the children.
I wonder if the patio doors to the McCann bedroom were checked for fingerprints.

by Paddingtom 23.05.24 7:33

this is a callout to those of you who do not belive the smiths.

I have looked at several of the smithman postings and they seem toconcentrate on inconsistencies.......Ok, Ive got that....

.what I need to know please is what are you saying their involvement is?.....In other words please tell me your theory of why they are part of this saga....what is their motive, how do they contribute to the plot?.....just cant get my head around what you think they are doing ...are they working with murat against mccanns ...are they working for mccanns against murat......are they working for some shady organisation...etc etc..... please help me understand your theory of their motivation.....

by Paddingtom 23.05.24 7:53

P.S. Please also explain your theory of what their contribution of Smithman does..i.e how does it contribute to the overall scam?
many thanks

by **Bluebagthepirate** 23.05.24 9:04

I don't get the plan being so they would be on CCTV.
Surely they would have seen Gerry - he wasn't in disguise.

by Paddingtom 23.05.24 11:48

This is old cctv we are talking about....it would have been a grainy image of an average bloke carrying a blonde girl.......not much more than that.....

Where are the Smith disbelivers?......Please tell me how you think they fit in....what were they recruited to do?....

by **Bluebagthepirate** 23.05.24 12:26

How do you know they knew it would be grainy?

I'm not buying it as you can tell

by **crusader** 23.05.24 13:30

What have the Smith family done to help the McCann's?
If, as some believe, they were paid to clear Murat and say they saw a man with a child at 10pm, what was gained from it?
Why would they at a later date say they think it was Gerry they saw?
The only reason I can think of is they were paid to incriminate Gerry, it wasn't to help him.
If on the other hand they are who they say they are, they were in the right place to see exactly what they were supposed to see, that Madeleine was alive on 3rd May and was being abducted.

by Paddingtom 23.05.24 13:31

It was 2007....not 2024.....cctv was not as refined.....

You dont have to believe me...thats fine.....Ive got no skin in the game...I just want the truth to prevail....it matters not whose theory is right.....

AS far as I understand it, a large proportion of this forum do not belive the smiths.......will one of you please come forward and explain what you see as their role in all this if it wasnt to tell the truth?.........

by Paddingtom 23.05.24 13:37

crusader wrote:What have the Smith family done to help the McCann's?
If, as some believe, they were paid to clear Murat and say they saw a man with a child at 10pm, what was gained from it?
Why would they at a later date say they think it was Gerry they saw?
The only reason I can think of is they were paid to incriminate Gerry, it wasn't to help him.
If on the other hand they are who they say they are, they were in the right place to see exactly what they were supposed to see, that Madeleine was alive on 3rd May and was being abducted.

Interesting, but who would have paid them to clear Murat? Who would have paid them to incriminate Gerry?

Im not having a go, I just want people to justify what they are saying as much as possible......which is severely lacking in the Smithn disbelievers.....

I agree where youre coming from Crusader, but Im one of the ones that think she died much earlier and it wasnt her he was carrying.......but thats fine, we can agree to disagree...

by Cake Lover 23.05.24 13:40

It would be madness to get an entire family involved. Why would anybody assumed they looked dodgy enough to approach? It seems to me that they are telling it as they see it.

by **Silentscope** 23.05.24 13:59

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Post#171
Interesting, but who would have paid them to clear Murat? Who would have paid them to incriminate Gerry?

How likely is it that if Murat had just been declared a Suspect, he would not reach out to anyone he knew, in the hope that someone could get him off the Hook that he was on?

Lori Campbell and Jon Clarke had just set him up as a Suspect.
The Tapas Crew had said he was outside the OC that night.
Tanner sent her sighting in the direction of his Home.

Why would the Smiths not want to help Murat out of a completely invented situation where he was being Scapegoated to protect the McCanns?

There is no Evidence that they were paid to do so. By anyone.

by Paddingtom 23.05.24 14:55

Ok Silentscope, thankyou for being the first to come up with an attempt at explaininmg...... your theory being they just came forward and lied to get Murat off?........ok thats fine......its the first theory.......any more?

by **crusader** 23.05.24 14:57

The Smith's have been called part of "team McCann" so directly or indirectly money must have changed hands at some point if this was the case, that of course is a theory yet to be proven.
I don't think the Smith's were part of team McCann or are anything other than what they are.
If, Madeleine died before the 3rd May and I now think she may have done, It would be to the McCann advantage that someone saw a man with a child on 3rd and linked it to Madeleine being abducted.

by Paddingtom 23.05.24 15:05

Crusader, am I to understand that you think it was just some random?

by **crusader** 23.05.24 15:15

No, I think it was Gerry with a child.
Sorry to confuse, I know what I want to post in my head, it sometimes comes out wrong.
To be clear.
I believe Madeleine died on either 1st or 2nd May.
I believe the Smith's are 100% telling the truth about what they saw.
I believe it was Gerry McCann carrying a child.
I don't believe the Smith family, or Martin Smith in particular , are in any way part of "team McCann"

by **Ladyinred** 23.05.24 15:53

It it was Gerry carrying his dead child, that is a breathtaking, high-risk course of action.

Thanks, Crusader.

by **crusader** 23.05.24 16:01

I don't think it was Madeleine he was carrying, she would already be gone by then.
It was to link Man + Child = abduction.

by Cake Lover 23.05.24 16:11

I presume a man (or woman) carrying a child at night wouldn't have been unusual; families on holiday, bedtimes not so stringent, etc. I think the biggest risk was in Gerry being stopped by somebody, and engaged in conversation, unless they had decided how to handle that without dropping themselves in it.

Latest topics