Smithman theory
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Latest News and Debate :: Debate Section - for purporting theories
Page 4 of 10 • Share
Page 4 of 10 • 
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 
Re: Smithman theory
by Jill Havern 14.05.24 20:09
Martin Smith-
“States that it is not possible for him to recognise the individual in person or by photograph.”
“He did not notice any other relevant details partly due to the fact that the lighting was not very good.”
“He has nothing else to offer the investigation.”
Aiofe Smith-
“Questioned, states that probably she would not be able to recognise either the individual or the child.”
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
“States that it is not possible for him to recognise the individual in person or by photograph.”
“He did not notice any other relevant details partly due to the fact that the lighting was not very good.”
“He has nothing else to offer the investigation.”
Aiofe Smith-
“Questioned, states that probably she would not be able to recognise either the individual or the child.”
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
____________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MAGA [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MBGA
Jill Havern- Chief Faffer, Forum Owner
- Posts : 31144
Activity : 43960
Likes received : 7758
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe -
crusader likes this post
Re: Smithman theory
by crusader 14.05.24 20:37
Very true, Peter Smith also said the same.
Even so, the statements they gave to the PJ on 26th May were very detailed.
It was only later in September that they thought it could be Gerry after seeing him arriving back in England carrying Sean down the aircraft steps that he thought the man they saw could be Gerry.
It wasn't his face he recognised, it was the way he was carrying the child, the same manner as the man in Portugal.
Even so, the statements they gave to the PJ on 26th May were very detailed.
It was only later in September that they thought it could be Gerry after seeing him arriving back in England carrying Sean down the aircraft steps that he thought the man they saw could be Gerry.
It wasn't his face he recognised, it was the way he was carrying the child, the same manner as the man in Portugal.
crusader- Forum support
- Posts : 6805
Activity : 7156
Likes received : 345
Join date : 2019-03-12
Paddingtom likes this post
Re: Smithman theory
by Jill Havern 14.05.24 20:55
But wasn't Gerry carrying whoever (insert name here) across his arms, rather than on his shoulder?
____________________
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MAGA [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]MBGA
Jill Havern- Chief Faffer, Forum Owner
- Posts : 31144
Activity : 43960
Likes received : 7758
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe -
Re: Smithman theory
by crusader 14.05.24 21:01
That was Tannerman, another good reason not to believe her.
crusader- Forum support
- Posts : 6805
Activity : 7156
Likes received : 345
Join date : 2019-03-12
Paddingtom likes this post
Re: Smithman theory
by Paddingtom 15.05.24 7:34
Thankyou both for your contributiions, I agree with Crusader, it wasnt Gerrys face theyrecognised it was his mannerisms, and all the smiths said he was carryinmg the child on his left shoulder....the result of which, it deliberately obscured his face a bit..... I believ the different heights of the family would have given them a different viewpoint and they would have observed slightly different details....
Crusader: The point of the long sleeves has been raised before and my theory of it actally being Ella could explain this.....IF it was Ella, would you want to dress her in a recently deceased childs clothes?
Im not sure I would....my belif is that it was Ellas pjs...with long sleeves....they clearly had to look similar enough to Maddies for the benefit of a grainy cctv, but I really cant see them being maddies pjs.
As for the description, I think its quite detailed given the couple of seconds he saw him, it was dark and he was deliberately trying to obscure himself:
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.
The statement goes on and on with various other bits of info. All this is being discarded in favour of a one line sentence:
States that it is not possible for him to recognise the individual in person or by photograph.
Im sorry but I think this sentence has been blown out of proportion and everything else he said has been ignored.....Hed never seen the man before and didnt recognise him...he was unable to identify him...fair enough......
Just imagine you see someone walking down your street that youve never seen before,,,you might superficially look at him and mention to your other half that a stange man was walking down your street that you didnt recognise and couldnt identify.....The next day, there he is again and you recognise him......turns out hes the new neighbour that just moved in at the end of the road......
Im sorry, but I feel that possibly becaus of RDHs wonderful films, we have all been so engrosed in his forensic work that we tend to believe everything he says rather than thinking for ourselves, To my mind, he was very keen to have an excuse to dismiss tha smith sighting because he just couldnt come up with a sensible explanation of what the hell Gerry was doing wondering around PDL with Maddies corpse on may 3rd when he was convinced she died on 29th?........
Im not having a go at RDH...I think hes amazing and does wonderful work but he himself says something on the lines of only belive half of what to see".......think for yourself.....How likely is it that the smiths have lied all these years.....and in the face of adversity....they sent a solicitors letter to several publications that printed erroneous information about him and the publications were forced to apologise......he no doubt has had this hanging over his and his familys head all this time and he has nver given in......he is an honest man who told his children to tell the police the truth....and they still do,,,,
Crusader: The point of the long sleeves has been raised before and my theory of it actally being Ella could explain this.....IF it was Ella, would you want to dress her in a recently deceased childs clothes?
Im not sure I would....my belif is that it was Ellas pjs...with long sleeves....they clearly had to look similar enough to Maddies for the benefit of a grainy cctv, but I really cant see them being maddies pjs.
As for the description, I think its quite detailed given the couple of seconds he saw him, it was dark and he was deliberately trying to obscure himself:
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.
The statement goes on and on with various other bits of info. All this is being discarded in favour of a one line sentence:
States that it is not possible for him to recognise the individual in person or by photograph.
Im sorry but I think this sentence has been blown out of proportion and everything else he said has been ignored.....Hed never seen the man before and didnt recognise him...he was unable to identify him...fair enough......
Just imagine you see someone walking down your street that youve never seen before,,,you might superficially look at him and mention to your other half that a stange man was walking down your street that you didnt recognise and couldnt identify.....The next day, there he is again and you recognise him......turns out hes the new neighbour that just moved in at the end of the road......
Im sorry, but I feel that possibly becaus of RDHs wonderful films, we have all been so engrosed in his forensic work that we tend to believe everything he says rather than thinking for ourselves, To my mind, he was very keen to have an excuse to dismiss tha smith sighting because he just couldnt come up with a sensible explanation of what the hell Gerry was doing wondering around PDL with Maddies corpse on may 3rd when he was convinced she died on 29th?........
Im not having a go at RDH...I think hes amazing and does wonderful work but he himself says something on the lines of only belive half of what to see".......think for yourself.....How likely is it that the smiths have lied all these years.....and in the face of adversity....they sent a solicitors letter to several publications that printed erroneous information about him and the publications were forced to apologise......he no doubt has had this hanging over his and his familys head all this time and he has nver given in......he is an honest man who told his children to tell the police the truth....and they still do,,,,
Paddingtom- Posts : 207
Activity : 223
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2024-04-28
crusader likes this post
Re: Smithman theory
by crusader 15.05.24 7:54
If it was Gerry and Ella, it could only be because Madeleine died earlier in the week and they wanted it to look like it was Madeleine being abducted that night.
Non of the other men were willing to take the risk of being seen, so it had to be Gerry.
It would also tie in to all the fuss about Russ and Jane's checking that night.
Non of the other men were willing to take the risk of being seen, so it had to be Gerry.
It would also tie in to all the fuss about Russ and Jane's checking that night.
crusader- Forum support
- Posts : 6805
Activity : 7156
Likes received : 345
Join date : 2019-03-12
Cammerigal and Paddingtom like this post
Re: Smithman theory
by Paddingtom 15.05.24 8:09
exactly Crusader. For me, it was gerry carrying ella for the benfit of cctv. maddie was long gone.
And dont forget all the similarities between the" sightings"......they all had to be similar to tie in with the cctv image. The reason the smiths description also matched, wasnt because they were in on it, it was because they actually saw him....buttons .....
And dont forget all the similarities between the" sightings"......they all had to be similar to tie in with the cctv image. The reason the smiths description also matched, wasnt because they were in on it, it was because they actually saw him....buttons .....
Paddingtom- Posts : 207
Activity : 223
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2024-04-28
Re: Smithman theory
by crusader 15.05.24 8:19
I'm bemused as to why the Smith sighting is so derided, I've never doubted they were telling the truth.
crusader- Forum support
- Posts : 6805
Activity : 7156
Likes received : 345
Join date : 2019-03-12
Re: Smithman theory
by Silentscope 15.05.24 9:42
It would have been easier for the PJ if there had been Photos taken at the Tapas Table so that they could see if anyone had the same clothing on as described by the Smith family.
But either no Photos were taken, the Camera was just there for show, or it was used to take Photos but they were later deleted.
So we cannot say if a pair of Beige trousers with buttons were worn by Gerry before the ‘Abduction’ was reported.
But if I was ‘Smithman’ I could use the going to the Toilet excuse to cover the time required to enter 5A, get changed, jog to the Church or the Beach, come back, get rid of the Smithman clothing and be back in my Jeans ready for the big reveal at 22:30. (Not 22:00 as widely reported)
Only one thing we can be sure of which would be Physically Impossible.
No one can be in two places at the same point in time.
So either the Smiths are right and Gerry was not at the Tapas table at 22:00.
Or he was, and they were mistaken, they saw someone else.
But either no Photos were taken, the Camera was just there for show, or it was used to take Photos but they were later deleted.
So we cannot say if a pair of Beige trousers with buttons were worn by Gerry before the ‘Abduction’ was reported.
But if I was ‘Smithman’ I could use the going to the Toilet excuse to cover the time required to enter 5A, get changed, jog to the Church or the Beach, come back, get rid of the Smithman clothing and be back in my Jeans ready for the big reveal at 22:30. (Not 22:00 as widely reported)
Only one thing we can be sure of which would be Physically Impossible.
No one can be in two places at the same point in time.
So either the Smiths are right and Gerry was not at the Tapas table at 22:00.
Or he was, and they were mistaken, they saw someone else.
Silentscope- Investigator
- Posts : 3119
Activity : 3234
Likes received : 121
Join date : 2020-06-30
Re: Smithman theory
by crusader 15.05.24 9:54
There are also a number of people who gave statements that said the "event" happened earlier.
people independent from the tapas workers said in statements, they were searching from around 9-30.
Also Stephen Carpenter's wife was said to have heard someone calling Madeline just after 9-30 when they left the tapas bar to go home.
Carpenter didn't say in his statement that Gerry was still in the tapas bar when they left.
He did say he saw Kate and Gerry leaving the table at times, which is a lie if the McCann's statements are to be believed, Kate never left the table untill after the Carpenter's had left.
people independent from the tapas workers said in statements, they were searching from around 9-30.
Also Stephen Carpenter's wife was said to have heard someone calling Madeline just after 9-30 when they left the tapas bar to go home.
Carpenter didn't say in his statement that Gerry was still in the tapas bar when they left.
He did say he saw Kate and Gerry leaving the table at times, which is a lie if the McCann's statements are to be believed, Kate never left the table untill after the Carpenter's had left.
crusader- Forum support
- Posts : 6805
Activity : 7156
Likes received : 345
Join date : 2019-03-12
Re: Smithman theory
by Silentscope 15.05.24 11:42
People in the Millenium reported hearing the commotion before 22:00 as well.
Before, during or after the Alert if Gerry was ‘Smithman’ he had to have been away from the OC. Unless the Smiths were told to change the time of their sighting?
Only one Answer fits.
Which?
21:30 to 22:00 or 22:00 - 22:30?
Before, during or after the Alert if Gerry was ‘Smithman’ he had to have been away from the OC. Unless the Smiths were told to change the time of their sighting?
Only one Answer fits.
Which?
21:30 to 22:00 or 22:00 - 22:30?
Silentscope- Investigator
- Posts : 3119
Activity : 3234
Likes received : 121
Join date : 2020-06-30
Re: Smithman theory
by Paddingtom 15.05.24 11:47
crusader wrote:I'm bemused as to why the Smith sighting is so derided, I've never doubted they were telling the truth.
Crusader, The reason the Smith sighting is so contentious is because it has got far reaching implications.
As I said previously, it matters to RDH because it does not fit in with his theory.
It matters to the Portugese police because the Smiths are their star witnesses.
It matters to Team Mccann because it blew up all their plans:
They had got their patsy: Murat. Many of the team Mccann agreed it was him and Goncalo, in his book admitted that the “profilers” agreed he was a good candidate. It would go to kangaroo court, he would be convicted and we would have all forgotten about it within the year.
But the Smiths rocked up and said “Its not him”.
After desperately trying to bury the Smith sighting and being unable to they had to reluctantly accept that promoting Murat was untenable now. The Smiths had put a spanner in the works that they couldnt get out. There was no point pursuing it.
So, they had their secret meetings to confirm the abandonment of operation Patsy1 and decided the best thing they could do in the circumstances was to try and get as much control of the Smiths as possible and try to influence their future statements to sound less like Gerry.
Meanwhile the search for patsy2 began.
However, the media loved the extra revenue from sales of their papers. The Mccanns loved the extra revenue from donations by the public. The “private Investigators” loved the extra revenue from chasing their tails.....the list goes on.......so noone was in a hurry to bring an end to it....
However, all good things must come to an end and eventually it was decided that enough was enough and a serious search for Patsy2 began.
Christian B turns up. Mr Smith recently stated that he didnt recognise Christian B but no-one had asked his opinion.
I wonder why that is? Perhaps because it didnt go well last time they asked for your opinion did it?
Paddingtom- Posts : 207
Activity : 223
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2024-04-28
Re: Smithman theory
by Paddingtom 15.05.24 11:52
The police retrieved the Smiths bar bill .....If I remeber correctly it placed them at the scene at 22.00 ish....they couldnt change the time of their sighting...the evidence proved it.Silentscope wrote:People in the Millenium reported hearing the commotion before 22:00 as well.
Before, during or after the Alert if Gerry was ‘Smithman’ he had to have been away from the OC. Unless the Smiths were told to change the time of their sighting?
Only one Answer fits.
Which?
21:30 to 22:00 or 22:00 - 22:30?
Paddingtom- Posts : 207
Activity : 223
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2024-04-28
Silentscope likes this post
Re: Smithman theory
by shirleytemple 15.05.24 13:37
Yes, how the Smith version fits. Two different little blonde girls theory i would never have thought of it.Cake Lover wrote:A different child being used at one point is not impossible; the girls were described as 'all blonde, all pretty'.
shirleytemple- Posts : 8
Activity : 12
Likes received : 4
Join date : 2016-02-14
Re: Smithman theory
by Silentscope 15.05.24 22:08
Paddingtom wrote:The police retrieved the Smiths bar bill .....If I remeber correctly it placed them at the scene at 22.00 ish....they couldnt change the time of their sighting...the evidence proved it.Silentscope wrote:People in the Millenium reported hearing the commotion before 22:00 as well.
Before, during or after the Alert if Gerry was ‘Smithman’ he had to have been away from the OC. Unless the Smiths were told to change the time of their sighting?
Only one Answer fits.
Which?
21:30 to 22:00 or 22:00 - 22:30?
Either the whole group did not order very many Drinks, or the Drinks are very cheap there!
€8 or €5 were the last three Transactions before 22:00.
Everything was paid Cash.
Not Card.
No one remembers the Group being there.
Not enough for me, sorry.
Larger sums were printed on the Reciepts later that evening which would be more consistent with a large Group.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Silentscope- Investigator
- Posts : 3119
Activity : 3234
Likes received : 121
Join date : 2020-06-30
Re: Smithman theory
by sharonl 15.05.24 23:18
The times of these receipts seem to be:
21:46
21:49
21;50
22:16
22:24
and they all say bar * 1
are we to believe that the family all went to the bar separately within minutes of each other?
If they drinks were paid for in cash, why is "Caixa" showing on the receipts? Isn't this a Portuguese bank?
sharonl- Forum Owner
- Posts : 8643
Activity : 11282
Likes received : 1397
Join date : 2009-12-29 -
Re: Smithman theory
by crusader 15.05.24 23:27
Caixa translated simply means box it is also a financial institution or cash box.
crusader- Forum support
- Posts : 6805
Activity : 7156
Likes received : 345
Join date : 2019-03-12
Re: Smithman theory
by sharonl 15.05.24 23:34
It also looks like the bar may have been quiet at the time.
The receipts are numbered 57 - 61 inclusive so the Smiths (if it were them) must have been the only people served between 21:46 and 22:24
The receipts are numbered 57 - 61 inclusive so the Smiths (if it were them) must have been the only people served between 21:46 and 22:24
sharonl- Forum Owner
- Posts : 8643
Activity : 11282
Likes received : 1397
Join date : 2009-12-29 -
Re: Smithman theory
by crusader 15.05.24 23:49
5 receipts in half an hour is not much for sure, so yes, it does seem there was not a lot of people about.
And they do all look like single drinks being bought.
21 -50 then a gap until 22-16 and the Smiths were out of there somewhere around 10pm.
And they do all look like single drinks being bought.
21 -50 then a gap until 22-16 and the Smiths were out of there somewhere around 10pm.
crusader- Forum support
- Posts : 6805
Activity : 7156
Likes received : 345
Join date : 2019-03-12
Re: Smithman theory
by Silentscope 16.05.24 7:59
Or so they say.
No large amounts of Drinks seem to have been served to a large group and paid for before the appointed time 22:00 when they left to meet Smithman.
The last large Transaction was at 21:39 for €13,75.
No one used a Bank card which could have been traced to the Smiths.
As I said, not enough Independent proof that they were really there until 22:00. The only reason I can think of is that the Smiths paid at 21:39 for their Drinks, took 20 minutes to consume them, then left around 22:00.
An important time for the British, as the Polls were closing in the U.K. and a Child was to be reported missing at exactly the same time?
All just a coincidence?
No large amounts of Drinks seem to have been served to a large group and paid for before the appointed time 22:00 when they left to meet Smithman.
The last large Transaction was at 21:39 for €13,75.
No one used a Bank card which could have been traced to the Smiths.
As I said, not enough Independent proof that they were really there until 22:00. The only reason I can think of is that the Smiths paid at 21:39 for their Drinks, took 20 minutes to consume them, then left around 22:00.
An important time for the British, as the Polls were closing in the U.K. and a Child was to be reported missing at exactly the same time?
All just a coincidence?
Silentscope- Investigator
- Posts : 3119
Activity : 3234
Likes received : 121
Join date : 2020-06-30
Re: Smithman theory
by crusader 16.05.24 8:36
There is another scenario not yet considered,
Aoife said they left Dolphin restaurant around 9:30, so it's not impossible that the bar bill at 20:28 for 24:50 was their bill.
She said they were in Kelly's bar around 30 minutes.
Aoife said they left Dolphin restaurant around 9:30, so it's not impossible that the bar bill at 20:28 for 24:50 was their bill.
She said they were in Kelly's bar around 30 minutes.
crusader- Forum support
- Posts : 6805
Activity : 7156
Likes received : 345
Join date : 2019-03-12
Re: Smithman theory
by Paddingtom 16.05.24 8:39
Whats all this about the election? I dont know this connection....apologies if its all been discussed before, but can you please tell me the gist of what the theory is please?
Paddingtom- Posts : 207
Activity : 223
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2024-04-28
Re: Smithman theory
by crusader 16.05.24 8:50
It was only local elections I believe, not a general election.
crusader- Forum support
- Posts : 6805
Activity : 7156
Likes received : 345
Join date : 2019-03-12
Re: Smithman theory
by Silentscope 16.05.24 9:22
The Dolphin Restaurant is only 50 Metres away from Kelly’s Bar so it would not take 5 minutes to walk. Even with small Children in tow.
Who paid how much and when was worthy of deeper investigation.
The Smiths could not have paid €24,50 in Kelly’s at 20:28 because they were still eating in the Dolphin Restaurant at that time, or?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] the Theory about 22:00 is that the McCanns had already made contact or been contacted by the U.K. government because they had been informed that a Death had occurred, which was going to be covered up.
The Parents planned to or were told to make the Case for an Abduction in the Mainstream Media and the Government did not want the Election overshadowed in the Press. The Election was more important to the Government than a missing person.
Therefore the Abduction Alert was ordered / to be made at 22:00 after the Polling Stations closed. It was not a General Election issue as Crusader rightly stated, but who was being Elected to where might give us some Clues.
The Sighting of ‘Smithman’ could have been made on the way TO Kelly’s 21:40 and not after leaving it around 22:00?
If ‘Smithman’ was Gerry then either the times are wrong, or have been changed to suit a purpose by someone.
Because no one person can be at the Tapas Table, and running through PDL at the same point in time.
Either:
The time of raising the Alert is wrong.
Or the Sighting of the Smith’s is wrong.
If Gerry really was ‘Smithman’!
Who paid how much and when was worthy of deeper investigation.
The Smiths could not have paid €24,50 in Kelly’s at 20:28 because they were still eating in the Dolphin Restaurant at that time, or?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] the Theory about 22:00 is that the McCanns had already made contact or been contacted by the U.K. government because they had been informed that a Death had occurred, which was going to be covered up.
The Parents planned to or were told to make the Case for an Abduction in the Mainstream Media and the Government did not want the Election overshadowed in the Press. The Election was more important to the Government than a missing person.
Therefore the Abduction Alert was ordered / to be made at 22:00 after the Polling Stations closed. It was not a General Election issue as Crusader rightly stated, but who was being Elected to where might give us some Clues.
The Sighting of ‘Smithman’ could have been made on the way TO Kelly’s 21:40 and not after leaving it around 22:00?
If ‘Smithman’ was Gerry then either the times are wrong, or have been changed to suit a purpose by someone.
Because no one person can be at the Tapas Table, and running through PDL at the same point in time.
Either:
The time of raising the Alert is wrong.
Or the Sighting of the Smith’s is wrong.
If Gerry really was ‘Smithman’!
Silentscope- Investigator
- Posts : 3119
Activity : 3234
Likes received : 121
Join date : 2020-06-30
Re: Smithman theory
by Cake Lover 16.05.24 9:27
I can't visualise Gerry McCann asking one of his friends to carry his deceased daughter around, or that friend saying 'Of course I will'. I'm pretty sure none of his mates would oblige, unless they are really stupid. So, it would have to be Gerry McCann pretending to be the 'abductor' imo. That's rather a simple view, but I can't imagine any other scenario.
Cake Lover- Posts : 2675
Activity : 2730
Likes received : 55
Join date : 2024-02-13
crusader and Silentscope like this post
Re: Smithman theory
by Silentscope 16.05.24 10:07
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] Aha, I see your point now, thanks.
Silentscope- Investigator
- Posts : 3119
Activity : 3234
Likes received : 121
Join date : 2020-06-30
Re: Smithman theory
by crusader 16.05.24 10:10
Ignore my last post, I got the timings completely wrong.
Silentscope is right, the Smiths bill could be the one at
21:39, because Aoife said they left the Dolphin restaurant at 9-30.
Silentscope is right, the Smiths bill could be the one at
21:39, because Aoife said they left the Dolphin restaurant at 9-30.
crusader- Forum support
- Posts : 6805
Activity : 7156
Likes received : 345
Join date : 2019-03-12
Re: Smithman theory
by Silentscope 16.05.24 10:14
The McCanns like Dr.Who but even they do not have a Time Machine!
TARDIS
Time
And
Relative
Dimensions
In
Space
TARDIS
Time
And
Relative
Dimensions
In
Space
Silentscope- Investigator
- Posts : 3119
Activity : 3234
Likes received : 121
Join date : 2020-06-30
Re: Smithman theory
by Paddingtom 17.05.24 7:56
It would indeed appear that you cant be in two places at once. Ive just found this little nugget from Goncalo's book:
“It does not matter whether, at the time of the sighting by Martin S.'s family, the father of the child was in fact dining in the restaurant of the complex. The employees of the restaurant, Svetlana S. and Joaquim B., claim that the father was absent for more than thirty minutes, but their testimony was not considered relevant.”
Or perhaps it was a bit too relevant for comfort....
Ive also found out that the Portugese police told the Smiths not to discuss their sighting in accordance with Portugese law.
As we know, team Mccann took no notice of Portugese law and proceeded to talk to anyone and everyone but the Smiths, as law abiding citizems, abided by this request which would explain their refusal to engage with RDH when he tried to question them,
We know from the files describing the events surrounding the taking of the Smiths statements, that the Irish police specifically stated
“He has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits. He sent a solicitor's letter to six papers in relation material that was printed that was misquoted. The Evening Herald paid his solicitor's fees and all papers printed an apology. His photograph appeared in another tabloid paper and this matter is being pursued at the moment.
I do not believe that Martin Smith is courting the press and my view his is a genuine person. He is known locally and is a very decent person.”
Unfortunately it seems that he was eventually pursuaded to “help” Team Mccann, but as his family stated, they were keen to do anything they could to help and you cannot expect them to have been able to distinguish between genuine officials trying to solve the case and fake officials trying to hinder it....... wouldnt you trust that the parents were desperate to find their lost child?
“It does not matter whether, at the time of the sighting by Martin S.'s family, the father of the child was in fact dining in the restaurant of the complex. The employees of the restaurant, Svetlana S. and Joaquim B., claim that the father was absent for more than thirty minutes, but their testimony was not considered relevant.”
Or perhaps it was a bit too relevant for comfort....
Ive also found out that the Portugese police told the Smiths not to discuss their sighting in accordance with Portugese law.
As we know, team Mccann took no notice of Portugese law and proceeded to talk to anyone and everyone but the Smiths, as law abiding citizems, abided by this request which would explain their refusal to engage with RDH when he tried to question them,
We know from the files describing the events surrounding the taking of the Smiths statements, that the Irish police specifically stated
“He has been contacted by numerous tabloid press looking for stories. He has been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy who is supporting the McCann family to take part in a photo fit exercise. He has given no stories or helped in any photo fits. He sent a solicitor's letter to six papers in relation material that was printed that was misquoted. The Evening Herald paid his solicitor's fees and all papers printed an apology. His photograph appeared in another tabloid paper and this matter is being pursued at the moment.
I do not believe that Martin Smith is courting the press and my view his is a genuine person. He is known locally and is a very decent person.”
Unfortunately it seems that he was eventually pursuaded to “help” Team Mccann, but as his family stated, they were keen to do anything they could to help and you cannot expect them to have been able to distinguish between genuine officials trying to solve the case and fake officials trying to hinder it....... wouldnt you trust that the parents were desperate to find their lost child?
Paddingtom- Posts : 207
Activity : 223
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2024-04-28
crusader likes this post
Re: Smithman theory
by crusader 17.05.24 8:07
"It does not matter whether, at the time of the sighting by Martin S.'s family, the father of the child was in fact dining in the restaurant of the complex. The employees of the restaurant, Svetlana S. and Joaquim B., claim that the father was absent for more than thirty minutes, but their testimony was not considered relevant.”
And we have Jane Tanner Backing this up in her statement.
Kate was moaning that Gerry had been gone ages, probably watching football.
And we have Jane Tanner Backing this up in her statement.
Kate was moaning that Gerry had been gone ages, probably watching football.
crusader- Forum support
- Posts : 6805
Activity : 7156
Likes received : 345
Join date : 2019-03-12
Page 4 of 10 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
Similar topics» The Theory that Smithman = Gerry McCann – CAREFULLY EXPLAINED
» SMITHMAN 8 - The Nine Phases of Smithman - How the Smiths became part of the McCann Team in January 2008
» Follow the money trail.
» SMITHMAN 9 - Is Goncalo Amaral sticking to his original conclusions re Smithman?
» Smithman - A Question by phil_burton
» SMITHMAN 8 - The Nine Phases of Smithman - How the Smiths became part of the McCann Team in January 2008
» Follow the money trail.
» SMITHMAN 9 - Is Goncalo Amaral sticking to his original conclusions re Smithman?
» Smithman - A Question by phil_burton
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Latest News and Debate :: Debate Section - for purporting theories
Page 4 of 10
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
