Why I believe Smithman is real and likely to be Gerry by Pat Brown

by bristow 06.06.14 14:30

http://patbrownprofiling.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/why-i-believe-smithman-is-real-and.html

by utahagen 06.06.14 14:40

I just posted what is below on Pat Brown's own website:

(MY opinion only) Exactamundo, Pat! It's always been glaringly obvious to me that Smithman exists and was probably Gerry (or someone in cahoots with Gerry) because the McCanns, who would have flown off to Tazmania to chase down wacky leads of Madeleine lookalikes, consistently have ignored/dismissed the Smithman sighting. Especially since it would be possible that Smithman was carrying a living child -- one who was sleeping or unconscious, as opposed to dead -- and since the McCanns maintained Madeleine was alive someplace, WHY would they not have wanted to chase this lead?! The only explanation is that the McCanns knew that Smithman was Gerry (or a cohort) and that he was carrying a dead Madeleine to some hiding place. If THAT lead were followed up on, they knew ploice would find a dead Madeleine, or vestiges.

On another note, Pat -- may I call you, "Pat"? -- please KEEP posting. As I wrote on another website, I've been hoping you have exaggerated your belief in a whitewash as a way to let PJ/SY know that you are not going away, even if they the PJ/SY announce that aliens abducted Madeleine and that she now lives in Mars.

by MrsC 06.06.14 14:41

Pat Brown is absolutely right of course. The McCanns know exactly what happened to their daughter.

Also just noticed that Smithman resembles J Wilkins>

Why I believe Smithman is real and likely to be Gerry by Pat Brown Smithman

Why I believe Smithman is real and likely to be Gerry by Pat Brown Smithman

<<<<<<<<<<<

Why I believe Smithman is real and likely to be Gerry by Pat Brown Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSWnpfLCjZOE-b9ipEr070kTibpJUj7dDS8wZnZMpd43xMzySDh

by j.rob 06.06.14 14:47

It's just odd that the Smith family delayed reporting the sighting for so long. Or perhaps, for whatever reason, they were hoping that someone else would also have seen Smithman and would report him to the police.

But I do agree in other respects. Smithman was definitely played down in Kate's book where she tries very hard to convince the reader that he must be the same as Tannerman. Despite the fact that the 45 minute gap between the sightings would mean that the abductor would have been remarkably careless about trying not to be seen.

I guess the only way that the McCann's could 'sanitize' Smithman was to morph him into Tannerman. But if Smithman looks very like Gerry McCann (or even is Gerry McCann) as the Smith family claim he does, then he does not really match that well with the artist's impression of Tannerman who was described as having a southern European or Mediterranean appearance. And wearing clothes that gave Jane the impression he was not a tourist. (Or was this description designed, at least partly, to put Murat in the frame??)

Still, I suppose we can hardly expect Kate to write reams in her book about how the man that the Smith family saw is a dead-ringer for Gerry! Such an extraordinary coincidence that the abductor just happened to bear such a strong resemblance to Gerald McCann.

What a small world! big grin

by bristow 06.06.14 14:48

MrsC wrote:

Also just noticed that Smithman resembles J Wilkins>

Very much, I hadn't noticed that before either.

by j.rob 06.06.14 14:54

MrsC wrote:Pat Brown is absolutely right of course. The McCanns know exactly what happened to their daughter.

Also just noticed that Smithman resembles J Wilkins>

<<<<<<<<<<<

Yes, I thought that too.

by DurhamGuy1967 06.06.14 14:56

SY say Smithman is significant The current areas being searched tie in with where Smithman could have been heading. If Smithman was on the phone I wonder if the timing of this sighting ties in with phone records.

by **Tony Bennett** 06.06.14 15:06

utahagen wrote:because the McCanns...have consistently ignored/dismissed the Smithman sighting...

Therefore this needs repeating, again and again and again:

1. Smithman was specifically mentioned as quite possibly the same person as Tannerman, and quite deliberately so mentioned, in a documentary whose contents were controlled by the McCann Team, namely the 'Mockumentary' by Mentorn Media/Channel 4 (May 2009 (5 years ago))

2. Smithman was described on the McCanns' website as a suspect they want to trace, and a full description of Smithman by 'the Irish family' was given on their website every day from 2009 until today - over 5 years)

3. There were SIX pages of references to 'Smithman' in Dr Kate McCann's book 'madeleine', including three whole pages devoted to a detailed comparison between Tannerman and Smithman (pp. 370-372), again strongly suggesting that Tannerman and Smithman are one and the same.

@ utahagen:

It follows that your assertion that "the McCanns...have consistently ignored/dismissed the Smithman sighting" is wholly incorrect.

by Cristobell 06.06.14 15:26

j.rob wrote:It's just odd that the Smith family delayed reporting the sighting for so long. Or perhaps, for whatever reason, they were hoping that someone else would also have seen Smithman and would report him to the police.

But I do agree in other respects. Smithman was definitely played down in Kate's book where she tries very hard to convince the reader that he must be the same as Tannerman. Despite the fact that the 45 minute gap between the sightings would mean that the abductor would have been remarkably careless about trying not to be seen.

I guess the only way that the McCann's could 'sanitize' Smithman was to morph him into Tannerman. But if Smithman looks very like Gerry McCann (or even is Gerry McCann) as the Smith family claim he does, then he does not really match that well with the artist's impression of Tannerman who was described as having a southern European or Mediterranean appearance. And wearing clothes that gave Jane the impression he was not a tourist. (Or was this description designed, at least partly, to put Murat in the frame??)

Still, I suppose we can hardly expect Kate to write reams in her book about how the man that the Smith family saw is a dead-ringer for Gerry! Such an extraordinary coincidence that the abductor just happened to bear such a strong resemblance to Gerald McCann.

What a small world!

In a tiny town in Portugal there happened to be a child predator, same age, build and hairstyle as Gerry, who was fortunate enough to stumble upon an unlocked holiday apartment where 3 tiny children had been left alone and vulnerable. His uncanny resemblance to the father of the missing child is purely coincidental.

by Liz Eagles 06.06.14 15:29

@Cristobell

This isn't a tiny town in Portugal. It is by no means tiny.

by utahagen 06.06.14 15:35

Tony Bennett, take it up with Pat Brown, to whose column I was replying. The McCanns have played down Smithman, as opposed to Tannerman, whom they've played up. To the extent they acknowledge Smithman, it's been by implying or arguing that Smithman and Tannerman are one and the same. The McCanns have never shown the same interest in Smithman as they have in, say, visiting the Pope, speaking at conferences, or selling bracelets with Madeleine's name on them.

by dentdelion 06.06.14 16:10

It's just odd that the Smith family delayed reporting the sighting for so long. Or perhaps, for whatever reason, they were hoping that someone else would also have seen Smithman and would report him to the police.

I dont find it odd. This was an Irish family on hols... they were travelling home the following day. They were not watching 24 hr international news feed as people might sdo these days. There would have been the chaos of home journey/sorting selves after holiday. They might have not seen even an Irish news channel til Sunday evening... maybe not an item featuring on Irish news or in Irish Sunday papers that weekend. In the weeks that followed they might have gradually realised the significance but meanwhile hoped for some good outcome. Yes trail gone cold by time they might have reported but only triggered their memories when they say Gerry return in Sept ;carrying Sean in that distinctive way coming down the plane steps. I think it was that sight that prompted them to contact authorities

by jeanmonroe 06.06.14 16:28

HERE'SSSSSSSS "Smithman" 5mins 37 secs

"It is possible that JT is not the only person saw Madeleine being carried away by the 'ABDUCTOR' ( 'her' Tannerman)

A McCann 'production' AKA 'the mockumentary'

by Cristobell 06.06.14 16:32

aquila wrote:@Cristobell

This isn't a tiny town in Portugal. It is by no means tiny.

My apologies, though I don't know if it makes the coincidence more, or less, likely.

by j.rob 06.06.14 17:10

Ah. How interesting. Just digging around with timings here on the basis that timing is everything in life.

On 24th May 2007 the Portuguese police finally agree to an informal meeting with the McCanns at the British Consulate. 'To say that we were grateful to be given this 'special treatment (as it would be described by the Portuguese media) is a huge understatement' writes Kate on page 154 of Madeleine.

On 25th May 2007 the PJ finally release Jane's description of the man 'who in all probability carried Madeleine away'.

On 26th May 2007 Mr Smith goes to Portugal and gives a statement to police

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html

So how come, in her book, Kate writes that Jane's description had not been released to the public before the Irish witnesses made their statements? 'Every time I read these independent statements in the files (and neither could have influenced the other, remember - Jane's description had not been released to the public before the Irish witnesses made their statements.'

Although looking through press reports, it does appear that the Smiths contacted police two weeks after Madeleine's disappearance, so that would be around around 17th May 2007.

Snipped from one of the articles on the McCann files:

Speaking from his home in Drogheda, Co. Louth, Mr Smith recalled the sighting, which is strikingly similar to one by a friend of the McCanns, Jane Tanner. In hindsight, the retired Mr Smith said, the mans rude behaviour should have aroused his suspicions.

He explained: "The one thing we noted afterwards was that he gave us no greeting.

"My wife Mary remembered afterwards that she asked him, 'Oh, is she asleep?' But he never acknowledged her one way or another.

"He just put his head down and averted his eyes. This is very unusual in a tourist town at such a quiet time of the year."

Their description of the barefoot child and the man, who wore beige trousers, echoes that of Miss Tanner, who said she saw a man carrying a sleeping child away from the McCanns apartment about 9.15pm.

Though the Smith family believe they met an almost identical man closer to 10pm, the coincidence prompted them to contact police after they returned to Ireland. Mr Smith said: "Luz is such a small place and so quiet, we felt a duty to tell police and let them decide if it was important."

So just wondering if the release of the Jane Tanner 'Tannerman' sighting influenced the Smiths in any way?

by j.rob 06.06.14 17:26

From 3rd January 2008 article in Daily Mail:

On the night of the disappearance, Mr Smith was dining with his wife in the Dolphin restaurant in Praia Da Luz, where they are frequent visitors.

The couple were with their daughter Aoife, their son Peter and his wife Sile,as well as four grandchildren Tadhg, Cole, Aisling and Eimear.

All nine met the man holding a child but their recollection differs slightly from Miss Tanner's.

"In the image she gave, the man was holding the child forward in his arms. The man we saw had put the child over his shoulders. But Luz was very, very quiet at that time of the year and the likelihood of two young children being carried around like this is very small.

"Also, our timings are a bit different. She saw the man at 9.15pm. We say 9.45or 9.50pm and the sighting was only a five-minute walk from where the child was staying.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html

"I dont know if this information will help the McCanns. We kept interested in whats going on but we tried to avoid the limelight."

The father of six yesterday said the Irish family would do anything they could to help the McCanns find their missing daughter.

"We have not been contacted by the private detective hired by the McCanns, and have had no contact with the investigating police since May 26 last year.

If true, this is extraordinary!

Notice how in Gerry's blog in June 2007 after an Irish Crimewatch he is requesting Irish holiday-makers to send him their photos!

I bet he is! Shame the Smiths didn't do a little 'snapping' that evening.

by SixMillionQuid 06.06.14 18:21

dentdelion wrote:It's just odd that the Smith family delayed reporting the sighting for so long. Or perhaps, for whatever reason, they were hoping that someone else would also have seen Smithman and would report him to the police.

I dont find it odd. This was an Irish family on hols... they were travelling home the following day. They were not watching 24 hr international news feed as people might sdo these days. There would have been the chaos of home journey/sorting selves after holiday. They might have not seen even an Irish news channel til Sunday evening... maybe not an item featuring on Irish news or in Irish Sunday papers that weekend. In the weeks that followed they might have gradually realised the significance but meanwhile hoped for some good outcome. Yes trail gone cold by time they might have reported but only triggered their memories when they say Gerry return in Sept ;carrying Sean in that distinctive way coming down the plane steps. I think it was that sight that prompted them to contact authorities

How can they have failed to not know what was going on when the place was swarming with news crews, the police, helicopters etc only yards from where they were staying?

I believe people on that holiday knew each other far better than they've letting on.

by j.rob 06.06.14 18:25

And consider, if the man the Smiths saw was GM or one of his team carrying Madeleine, given that there are some reports of commotion about a missing child as early as 9.15pm, the person would not necessarily know that the Smith family had not already heard the news. Someone could have gone down to the bar they were at, for instance. And if they had heard the news, they could easily have taken a sneaky photo of the man carrying the child on their mobile as he scuttled away, to later show to police.

by j.rob 06.06.14 18:30

SixMillionQuid wrote:
dentdelion wrote:It's just odd that the Smith family delayed reporting the sighting for so long. Or perhaps, for whatever reason, they were hoping that someone else would also have seen Smithman and would report him to the police.

I dont find it odd. This was an Irish family on hols... they were travelling home the following day. They were not watching 24 hr international news feed as people might sdo these days. There would have been the chaos of home journey/sorting selves after holiday. They might have not seen even an Irish news channel til Sunday evening... maybe not an item featuring on Irish news or in Irish Sunday papers that weekend. In the weeks that followed they might have gradually realised the significance but meanwhile hoped for some good outcome. Yes trail gone cold by time they might have reported but only triggered their memories when they say Gerry return in Sept ;carrying Sean in that distinctive way coming down the plane steps. I think it was that sight that prompted them to contact authorities
How can they have failed to not know what was going on when the place was swarming with news crews, the police, helicopters etc only yards from where they were staying?

I believe people on that holiday knew each other far better than they've letting on.

This is a very good point. Only four of the family returned the following day. Martin Smith his wife and daughter and two grandchildren stayed on. So they would have witnessed the drama at first hand. Which does, indeed, make is extremely peculiar that not one of them thought the sighting was relevant enough to tell the police about for two whole weeks.

by SixMillionQuid 06.06.14 18:31

And his own daughter in Ireland told him exactly what was going on the 4th May

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

He only became aware of the disappearance of the child the next morning, through his daughter, L*****, in Ireland who had sent him a message or called him regarding what had happened

Given that a child has gone missing and now involves a major investigation what was holding them back?

by Cristobell 06.06.14 19:02

SixMillionQuid wrote:And his own daughter in Ireland told him exactly what was going on the 4th May

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

He only became aware of the disappearance of the child the next morning, through his daughter, L*****, in Ireland who had sent him a message or called him regarding what had happened

Given that a child has gone missing and now involves a major investigation what was holding them back?

I would say reluctance to get involved and reluctance to accuse the father, at a guess.

by RIPM 06.06.14 19:07

Keeping an open mind if I was told a child had been abducted I would assume rightly or wrongly the abductor would have got away as quickly as possible;

I would assume rightly or wrongly said abductor would have used a getaway car,therefore if I had seen a man walking with a child in his arms further and deeper into the town I would not be immediately ringing the police ,but then I do not have hindsight which I am told is a wonderful thing.

by **Tony Bennett** 06.06.14 19:22

utahagen wrote:Tony Bennett, take it up with Pat Brown, to whose column I was replying.

REPLY: I've already contributed to Pat's blog by saying politely but firmly that I do not think that the Smiths saw anyone and that therefore any claim that Smithman is Gerry must be false. However, even if we could prove that the Smiths did see someone, I regard the likelihood that Gerry was carrying a dead Madeleine around Praia da Luz at 10.00pm, at almost the exact time the alarm was raised, as little better than zero. She and I have agreed to disagree on the subject

The McCanns have played down Smithman, as opposed to Tannerman, whom they've played up. To the extent they acknowledge Smithman, it's been by implying or arguing that Smithman and Tannerman are one and the same.

REPLY: I would tend to concede the way you now put it. I was simply stating the obvious, that any claim that "the McCanns..have consistently ignored/dismissed the Smithman sighting" is patently untrue.

by CynicAl 06.06.14 20:32

Sorry, but its completely normal for witnesses to mundane events to connect them to a major incident nearby.

Smithman was out carrying a child like a father would at night in a tourist resort. He might have been rude and ignored people who spoke to him, but that's not a crime. Most people, other than busybodies, would file that away as irrelevent. And even if a kidnap had just been reported, I for one would not equate father-looking-guy and his sleepy daughter as the suspect making a getaway. Who would ever rationally conceive of kidnappers wandering through the streets with sleeping children? Kidnappers have getaway vehicles.

That's why Crimewatch even exists... To appeal to the people who were around the area at the time to jog their memories for mundane details, and the people calling in are doing EXACTLY what the Smith's did. No illogical, irrational conspiracy theory required.

by SixMillionQuid 06.06.14 21:00

Cristobell wrote:
SixMillionQuid wrote:And his own daughter in Ireland told him exactly what was going on the 4th May

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

He only became aware of the disappearance of the child the next morning, through his daughter, L*****, in Ireland who had sent him a message or called him regarding what had happened

Given that a child has gone missing and now involves a major investigation what was holding them back?
I would say reluctance to get involved and reluctance to accuse the father, at a guess.

Why should many that matter? If you're reluctant to do something then you're afraid of the consequences. And at the time of the statement he did not say who he thought it was and no one gave a full description of Smithmans facial features considering they saw him head on unlike Jane Tanners side profile.

Many people came forward in the hope it would help the police. And in the end he did point the finger, and then backed down.

My feeling is some people on holiday at that time knew each other well.

by SixMillionQuid 06.06.14 21:02

CynicAl wrote:Sorry, but its completely normal for witnesses to mundane events to connect them to a major incident nearby.

Smithman was out carrying a child like a father would at night in a tourist resort. He might have been rude and ignored people who spoke to him, but that's not a crime. Most people, other than busybodies, would file that away as irrelevent. And even if a kidnap had just been reported, I for one would not equate father-looking-guy and his sleepy daughter as the suspect making a getaway. Who would ever rationally conceive of kidnappers wandering through the streets with sleeping children? Kidnappers have getaway vehicles.

That's why Crimewatch even exists... To appeal to the people who were around the area at the time to jog their memories for mundane details, and the people calling in are doing EXACTLY what the Smith's did. No illogical, irrational conspiracy theory required.

If the event was so mundane why report it all?

EDIT: maybe it wasn't that mundane at all as one of the Smiths attempted to make conversation with this individual and received no response.

by dentdelion 06.06.14 21:26

maybe it wasn't that mundane at all as one of the Smiths attempted to make conversation with this individual and received no response

That is assuming he spoke English... and maybe he did not want to engage in conversation and disturb a sleeping child, understandable.

by Watching 06.06.14 21:40

dentdelion wrote: maybe it wasn't that mundane at all as one of the Smiths attempted to make conversation with this individual and received no response

That is assuming he spoke English... and maybe he did not want to engage in conversation and disturb a sleeping child, understandable.

And if it was Mr carrying Maddie - if he opened his fat mouth, the thick Glaswegian whining voice/accent, once heard, never forgotten - he wouldn't chance it, not even with short response to Mrs Smith

by Guest 06.06.14 22:01

If Gerry was carrying Madeleine at that point, where does that leave the blue sports bag?

The blue sports bag is the key.

It is my belief it was contaminated and that's what the dog picked up in the wardrobe.

The McCanns don't like questions about the bag.

Try asking them.

by russiandoll 06.06.14 22:09

When would Mr Smith have been aware from media reports that the little girl who had been abducted was dressed similarly to the child he saw, that she was age 3/4 and fair haired, making him sit up and take notice, when he had until that point of awareness seen what he thought was a father and child?