Re: Where could "Smith-man" have been heading? (OR: Was there ever a "Smith-man"?)

by justathought 19.10.13 23:51

russiandoll wrote:
justathought wrote:what is most significant. Is that SY had ample opportunity to interview the "smith's" before the airing of the crimewatch programme. but they choose not to. but happy to float the smith-man sighting as a credible sighting.
What about CW made you conclude that the Smiths had not been re-interviewed before it went to air?

because my understanding is they have only spoken to them on the 'phone.

by suzyjohnson 20.10.13 0:01

From reading the McCann files, it appears that it was Smith's son who flew home on 4th May, he was told that a young girl had disappeared when he reached the airport, but perhaps he didn't know any more details than that.

Smith's daughter had phoned Smith in PdL on 4th May to tell him about the disappearance she had seen on the news back in Ireland (shows how much notice Smith takes of what's going on around him) On 9th May, Smith returned to Ireland, as he found out the details of the case he started to think perhaps he had seen something significant and so reported this to the PJ. Three of the family made statements to the PJ on 26th May (they returned to PdL to do so)

by oakeso 20.10.13 0:08

suzyjohnson wrote:
I know that MM's disappearance was given coverage in Ireland but perhaps not so much as in England or Portugal. When Smith saw the tv news in Sept, what he thought he recognised more than the facial features was Gm's manner of walking and carrying a child.

At that point I think the only 24 hour news coverage in Ireland was Sky/CNN and was covered from the beginning on main Irish news - don't forget from almost the beginning media had worked the "Irish connection". It was well discussed in the workplace/socially right from 4th. I don't personally understand why the family would wait until the end of the month to make a statement unless they had already made contact with the authorities in Ireland/UK/Portugal and waited until the end of the month to travel and make an official statement.

by Woofer 20.10.13 0:11

They couldn`t have done a confession with him from what he said in his statement :-
"
When questioned, he said he never heard their confessions, perhaps because they only spoke English.

He never talked to them alone.

"

by suzyjohnson 20.10.13 0:17

oakeso wrote:
suzyjohnson wrote:
I know that MM's disappearance was given coverage in Ireland but perhaps not so much as in England or Portugal. When Smith saw the tv news in Sept, what he thought he recognised more than the facial features was Gm's manner of walking and carrying a child.
At that point I think the only 24 hour news coverage in Ireland was Sky/CNN and was covered from the beginning on main Irish news - don't forget from almost the beginning media had worked the "Irish connection". It was well discussed in the workplace/socially right from 4th. I don't personally understand why the family would wait until the end of the month to make a statement unless they had already made contact with the authorities in Ireland/UK/Portugal and waited until the end of the month to travel and make an official statement.

Ok, well clearly Smith's daughter had seen it on the Irish news as she had told her father about it in PdL. Smith, himself wasn't back in Ireland until the 9th. But then, you would've thought he could have made any enquiries he wanted to in PdL with all the searches going on around him.Perhaps it wasn't until he had spoken to his son back in Ireland that they thought what they had seen could be relevant. It must have taken a few days for them to arrange to fly back to PdL.

by Woofer 20.10.13 0:24

I been searching for a connection between the Smith`s apartment and RM. I know I read ages ago there was some connection - perhaps it was Robert Murat`s father who built the apartments and RM had something to do with selling them. Can anyone remember this.
Apparently Smith`s apartment was in joint ownership with a Li** ON****.

I`m interested to know how the CCTV recording was wiped - was it adjacent to the Estrela da Luz, Rua Manuel Augusto Alves Catarino where the Smith`s apartment was?

by Ribisl 20.10.13 0:49

The way some posters have used this thread to question the Smiths' statements based on their own seemingly biased perspective and unsubstantiatable assumptions is not very helpful imo as it can only add to confusion and help to muddy the case, not so dissimilar to the way the McCanns have been doing pretty successfully for the past six years.

Now we know that SY have very publicly turned their focus towards this sighting, I for one would prefer to wait and see what comes out of their ongoing investigation before passing any judgment.

by Q71 20.10.13 0:55

justathought wrote:
russiandoll wrote:
justathought wrote:what is most significant. Is that SY had ample opportunity to interview the "smith's" before the airing of the crimewatch programme. but they choose not to. but happy to float the smith-man sighting as a credible sighting.
What about CW made you conclude that the Smiths had not been re-interviewed before it went to air?
because my understanding is they have only spoken to them on the 'phone.

Quote ` My understanding is they only spoke to them on the phone.`

You couldn`t make it up. if true , utterly laughable.

Surely to God he was called back in for questioning before the programme was aired.The kind of questions put to him this thread is asking.
Yet SY as said giving the sighting creedence , and making it the cusp of the CW programme.

I mean , come on - talk about getting the fundamentals of detective work correct.........but , then again.

Spoke to him over the phone - Dear oh Dear !!!

by TheTruthWillOut 20.10.13 1:01

I just don't know what to think honestly. On the one hand, I can't see them trying to do a whitewash with all the high profile ones of recent months/years, but on the other hand, Redwood publicly stating the McCann's/Tapas 7 are not suspects is just not something the police (should) do in an on-going investigation.

by justathought 20.10.13 1:13

TheTruthWillOut wrote:I just don't know what to think honestly. On the one hand, I can't see them trying to do a whitewash with all the high profile ones of recent months/years, but on the other hand, Redwood publicly stating the McCann's/Tapas 7 are not suspects is just not something the police (should) do in an on-going investigation.

you make a valid point. un-professional for SY to mention "innocence" of people. when by their own admission they don't know all the facts surrounding the case. they are still grasping at straws to break the case. they have gone as far as they can and there last hope is that the crimewatch programme will force someone or people out of the woodwork

by loopzdaloop 20.10.13 1:39

macdonut wrote:This topic is something I can't quite get a grip of in my own mind.

If we believe Smithman exists and we assume it's GM and we also believe the cadaver dog found traces of Madeleine in the hire car then it doesn't make much sense to me.

Smithman wasn't running or obviously agitated. I'm sure I wouldn't have looked like someone out for a stroll if I was carrying my recently deceased child.

Was he going to a particular place? It was dark and he was in a strange town that he didn't know very well. If he was looking for somewhere to dump a body, why not the waste ground? Too close maybe? Had he already decided upon a location? How would he know where he could go - on foot with limited time - to hide a body that would resist a thorough search of the entire town? This could only have been premeditated in my mind and perhaps only with help. With all the publicity that ensued, it's likely that Madeleine's body would have to have been in that original location up until the McCann's moved it in their hire car over 3 weeks later. Is this realistic? Wouldn't someone have smelled a rotting body that was, at very best, in a shallow grave?

Key for me is GM would only have had a few minutes to dispose of the body and I find it hard to believe that he would have had a location already in his head where a rotting body could quickly be hidden that would lie undetected for such a long period of time despite hundreds of people searching.

In my thick skull one or more of these assumptions (1, Smithman exists; 2, it was GM; 3, Cadaver dog detects Madeleine in boot of car) cannot be true unless GM had much more time to think through and plan everything than current facts suggest.

I believe that there was a place with a freezer on route that amaral was reported to have looked at.
They would have to had stored the body somewhere imo. They would have to have taken it also imo.
I believe the smiths are not compromised by anyone and for anyone to suggest they were covering for Murat is fatally flawed.
Once the mccanns got the scenic, imo they took the blue tennis bag to the freezer store and picked up their daughter.

With regards to the relationship the police have with the mccanns, people need to watch true crime, crocodile tears on YouTube, or the story of the soham, murders.. You never overtly let the suspect know they are suspects.

by loopzdaloop 20.10.13 1:50

Curioser wrote:I think the Smith family sightings are real. Different people notice different things. I wouldn't notice a person's clothes at all probably but I would notice gait.

I reckon GM was carrying Maddie's body to hide it. There was some reason they didn't want there to be an autopsy. Either sedation, fear of child abuse charges or evidence of sexual abuse.

So he had to get rid of the body - he's a cold fish. A person who cuts people for a living, a person who feels comfortable making money out of his missing / dead child.

Gerry carries Madeleine down the stairs near G5A and notices Jez coming up the hill. He quickly places the body in the bushes and goes out on the street to talk to Jez. He waits until Jez is gone, picks up Madeleine and carries her towards the beach.

So he carries her through the streets towards...who knows where. It's a cold night. The resort town is not crowded. He's careful. He checks the streets are empty. Before heading down the hill on Rua da Escola Primaria he checks there is no-one about. He starts down the street. Suddenly a group of people appear from nowhere. He either didn't know about or forgot about the stairs that lead up from the pub. He hides his face as he passes them.

When he gets back to the apartment he takes off his clothes. The button trousers are in the photos of the main bedroom on the bed. I think he put them and his fleece or jumper in the cupboard. The cadaverine scent came off them. Then he got rid of them. Certainly they are not in the list of items checked by the sniffer dogs.

Cadaverine takes between 90 minutes to 2 hours to develop apparently. If the smell was only on the front of his trousers where her little legs and feet were, perhaps it wouldn't transfer to the bed. Or if his coat or fleece was long then perhaps the smell was only on them and not the trews. I don't know.

I don't know. Just speculation.

Spot on. I agree totally. Very well written. Unfortunately I am on a tablet so have issues typing properly.
The only thing I would add is that he took the body to that freezer and I believe the place e freezer was,was owned by Murat. I don't think Murat knew what they wanted to use it for, I think he is just the traditional lonely ex pat or villager who tries to get involved with lots of things hence why people knew off him. Did he not live with his mum? We have all met people like this before. Hence why mccanns thought he could be the paty. Imo, Prior to that the body was in the appartment fridge freezer hence the mccanns deciding to replace it.

by loopzdaloop 20.10.13 1:52

galena wrote:
Curioser wrote:I think the Smith family sightings are real. Different people notice different things. I wouldn't notice a person's clothes at all probably but I would notice gait.

I reckon GM was carrying Maddie's body to hide it. There was some reason they didn't want there to be an autopsy. Either sedation, fear of child abuse charges or evidence of sexual abuse.

So he had to get rid of the body - he's a cold fish. A person who cuts people for a living, a person who feels comfortable making money out of his missing / dead child.

Gerry carries Madeleine down the stairs near G5A and notices Jez coming up the hill. He quickly places the body in the bushes and goes out on the street to talk to Jez. He waits until Jez is gone, picks up Madeleine and carries her towards the beach.

So he carries her through the streets towards...who knows where. It's a cold night. The resort town is not crowded. He's careful. He checks the streets are empty. Before heading down the hill on Rua da Escola Primaria he checks there is no-one about. He starts down the street. Suddenly a group of people appear from nowhere. He either didn't know about or forgot about the stairs that lead up from the pub. He hides his face as he passes them.

When he gets back to the apartment he takes off his clothes. The button trousers are in the photos of the main bedroom on the bed. I think he put them and his fleece or jumper in the cupboard. The cadaverine scent came off them. Then he got rid of them. Certainly they are not in the list of items checked by the sniffer dogs.

Cadaverine takes between 90 minutes to 2 hours to develop apparently. If the smell was only on the front of his trousers where her little legs and feet were, perhaps it wouldn't transfer to the bed. Or if his coat or fleece was long then perhaps the smell was only on them and not the trews. I don't know.

I don't know. Just speculation.
Problem is that this doesn't explain where he hid the body and how the cadaverine odour was traced to their hire car ... Or why he didn't put the body in his sports bag - that would have attracted far less suspicion?

The sports bag came later. A picture of it in the cupboard is in the files. Prior to that it was not just a body, it was their daughter. It would be heartbreaking to jam her into a bag before they were ready.

by winjoy 20.10.13 2:09

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/437948/Is-this-the-moment-of-Madeleine-McCann-s-kidnapping

The Sunday Express has all but revealed the truth - pretty good to see this in the MSM:clapping:

by **Tony Bennett** 20.10.13 9:16

Ribisl wrote:...it can only add to confusion and help to muddy the case, not so dissimilar to the way the McCanns have been doing pretty successfully for the past six years.

But - is this a possibility - that it was the Smiths themselves who have 'added to the confusion'?

Ribisl: you wrote >>> "Now we know that SY have very publicly turned their focus towards this sighting..."

True. Absolutely true.

They are asking the 6.7 million people who watched Crimewatch, and the millions of others who saw e-fits in the press of two wholly different looking men - said to be the same man! - to see if they can remember him - after six years and five months.

Their appeal is based on the claims of the Smiths. At least I would hope that you would accept that in the light of what we know about the Smiths from this thread and elsewhere, and what they have said, that there is room for some doubt about them.

You clearly are of the belief that when Redwood has his 'revelation moment' and switches the attention of millions of Brits to Smith-man, that he is on a genuine mission to search for the truth and 'find the key that will unlock the mystery' etc. etc.

And that if he carries on for the next few months or years chasing his '41 persons of interest', that he will achieve some kind of 'breakthrough moment'.

Is there any other reason, other than that he holds the rank of Detective Chief Inspector in what used to be one of the world's finest police forces, that you have such touching faith and trust in him?

by ConcernedCitizen 20.10.13 9:46

Tony Bennett wrote:
ConcernedCitizen

Interesting long post of yours which tells me the following:

1. You have very great faith in Scotland Yard, even to the extent of saying that they have ‘a team on the ground’ trying to work out where ‘Smith-man’ came from. I thought he came from, er, Apartment G5A? (though unlikely, as we’ve discussed, that any abductor would hardly be wandering around Praia da Luz with an abducted child for several minutes)

2. You think that whoever he is, he really can be identified after six-and-a-half years

3. You reject any idea that Martin Smith might be better acquainted with Robert Murat than he has stated

4. You say that Smith, though not having had his glasses on the time, could have recognized whether it was Murat or not by his ‘gait’ and ‘general features’ (whatever that really means)

5. You agree that all the Smiths said they could not possibly recognise him if they were able to see him again

6. You think that Smith really did recognize Gerry McCann

7. You think that it’s very unlikely that the Smiths could be making up this sighting

8. You think that because the Smiths were all ‘walking several metres apart from each other’ that their descriptions of Smith-man’s face and other matters could be because they were looking at him from different angles ’

9. You think that there is real significance in the merging two images together (as some Professor has done), despite the fact that can be done with countless such images

10. You see nothing strange in Redwood producing two images – said to be of the same man - that, frankly, look like two different people

11. You think that for the past six years all members of Team McCann may genuinely have believed that ‘Tanner-man’ and ‘Smith-man’ were one and the same

12. You rely on an astrology website, astrologyincrime

13. You think it’s quite possible that Gerry McCann really would risk walking the streets of Praia da Luz with Madeleine at the very same time as his wife was sounding the alarm and saying that she was sure Madeleine had ben abducted

Are all those a correct representation of your views?

Short answer NO.

Long answer, the astrology shows why things are not as they seem in this case - it's the Neptune effect. It's not surprising to me therefore that so many people are questioning the veracity of everything and everyone associated with this case. But, when you do this, you need to be careful that you don't taint innocent victims, even when they come across seemingly untrustworthy and suspicious because of their actions or non-actions, mistakes, verbal ability or because of the people they are seemingly acquainted with - Jane Tanner is one person that immediately comes to mind here.

I think if you're going to question the Smith sighting and whether or not he was very well acquainted with Murat, you would need evidence, not just speculation. And, even if he was associated well with Murat - as you are suggesting - it doesn't then follow that Mr. Smith and his family would make a false claim about what they saw. Looking at Murat's astrology it's clear why he became a suspect, but his chart is no more worrisome than some others associated with this case ... and of course no evidence was found to charge Murat for any of the crime/s here.

What SY are currently doing - i.e. going back to zero - is exactly what needs to be done. Whether they will obtain evidence to make an arrest after 6.5 years is clearly going to be difficult. The Smith-man e-fits issued on CW seemed a bit odd TO ME - I would just have combined the details into one image, but not being a detective I know nothing about how these things work. I did read that Mr. Smith had been in contact with SY twice (if this is indeed the case) over the past 2 years, so perhaps they/SY were quite satisfied to issue the 2 e-fits in the way they did. SY following through on other people who were seen around the OC can also only be a good thing, except I was surprised to see their focus on these people (potential suspects) seemed to have been tacked on to the of the end of the CW program aired in the U.K. Airing a CW type of program in the Portugal would possibly bring them more answers.

As far as Inspector Redwood himself, I don't understand the criticism that some are aiming at him. If someone does have his biographical details I would like to look at his chart. Watching the CW program he came across to me as someone who likes the limelight and perhaps gave a hint that he doesn't always give due credit to others where it's due. Other than this, I'm convinced myself that SY are doing their best to find real answers to the many theories that have surrounded this case.

by sami 20.10.13 9:52

I know there is a theory that there was a stand in for Madeleine at the crèche signing in times etc.

I must confess to not being fully educated about that scenario. However I would ask the question if anybody has considered how this sighting might accord with Gerry McCann or another returning a live child, the stand in, to her parents ? Hence no cadaver to be detected on clothes etc. if it has been discussed could someone direct me to the thread please.

by Estelle 20.10.13 10:19

sami wrote:I know there is a theory that there was a stand in for Madeleine at the crèche signing in times etc.

I must confess to not being fully educated about that scenario. However I would ask the question if anybody has considered how this sighting might accord with Gerry McCann or another returning a live child, the stand in, to her parents ? Hence no cadaver to be detected on clothes etc. if it has been discussed could someone direct me to the thread please.

I can help you with this link and quote:

http://algarvenewswatch.blogspot.com.es/2013/10/madeleine-mccann-so-whats-new.html#comment-form

Dewi Lennard said on 15/10/13:

"May I just refer to my own research here, which I have shared with Chief Investigator Monteiro at Diretorio do Norte, Porto. I'll be brief.

Analysis of the telephone calls shows that the McCanns were starting the cover-up by 22.00 on 1 May, followed by Gerry's infamous 12 voicemails on 2nd.

And the creche attendance records show that a guest called (Robert) Naylor allowed GM to sign his own daughter (E) plus another girl in, from as early as 29 April.

No relationship Naylor/GM has ever been admitted or investigated. I believe the "other girl" whom GM claimed was Maddie, was in fact a little friend of the Naylors, called Madalene R...r".

Therefore, Gerry IMO could have taken his sedated daughter, Amelie, or another child, down those steps hoping to be seen but not recognised in the dark to support their abduction theory on May 3 and returned quickly to put her back in bed and to be seen at the OC. As Redwood said this could then be described as a "premeditated" (but faked) "abduction".

But as I am a believer in the earlier death scenario and have followed the above research on two forums for over two years IMO Maddie's body was already in a fridge/freezer in Apartment 5J earlier in the week because of this:

Talking about fridges.......this is where I think the body was stored temporarily - Apartment 5J then moved before the GNR dogs came.

GNR dogs

On 10th May at about 20h10, upon the request of the PJ, searches were carried out in all of the apartments belonging to blocks 4 and 5 of the OC, two tracker dogs and two search and rescue dogs being used for this operation, adopting the same methods as those used on 7th May, just that this time the apartments were all open and searched one by one, being accompanied by a representative from the resort, who had the keys to all the apartments (apart from those not under her administration) and also with the objective of helping with the searches. The collaboration of all the guests occupying the apartments at that time was requested for this purpose and those apartments that were found to be empty were opened by the administrator.

All the apartments were searched by the dogs and when they arrived at apartment 5J they began to sniff with intensity at the entrance door. During this behaviour it was noted by the PJ officers that there must be some unusual odour, but which with all certainty did not have anything to do with the odour being searched for, but there must have been something strange inside.

After entering the apartment, it was observed that the odour came from close to the fridge, which was open and contained some rotting meat and vegetables.

• Initiating the diligence, the first sniffer dog, after having smelled the towel used in the previous operation, began searching, it being certain that next to the doors of some apartment he demonstrated major interest whilst he did not even approach others. In none of these actions did the dog give him a signal that he had caught the scent of the missing child. It is certain however, that near apartment 5J, 5H and 4G, that the dog showed major interest in smelling the doors and the immediate areas. He states that next to 5H, there were two bags of rubbish which may condition the dog.

Just outside apartment 4G was a tray with plates, cutlery and cloth napkins, apparently used. It is certain that this apartment is the one where the missing child's parents were lodged (at the time).

In relation to the dog's interest at doorway 5J, the same may have been conditioned by the presence of people inside the apartment.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t5671-dogs-more-dogs-fridges-and-apartments?highlight=GNR+dogs+J

My apologies if you have already read this info on other threads.

by Searcher 20.10.13 10:45

Could someone say something more about the dumped fridge? Fridge or freezer? From where to where? When? Link welcome.

by AndyB 20.10.13 10:48

Tony Bennett wrote:
Woofer wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Is there any evidence though that the Smiths (or some of them) were friendly with Robert Murat? Mr Smith Senior knew him by sight and that I thought was it.

I have to say that it is odd to me that they did not immediately recognise Gerry the next day (when the story broke) as the person they had seen before.

I'm not accusing them of lying - it's simply that I can't at the moment fathom their statements out.

P.S. According to the Daily Mirror, Woofer, the camera was at the hotel Estrela da Luz.
From Sky News 7.4.2008
"But Mr Smith is certain that the man he and his family saw that night was not Robert Murat, who is still officially an "arguido" in the Madeleine McCann investigation.
"I told police it was definitely not him because the man wasn't as big as Murat - I think I would have recognised him because I'd met him several times previously."

Thanks for the location of the CCTV camera NFWTD
SEVERAL TIMES.

Thank you Woofer, we are edging closer to the truth about Robert Murat and Martin Smith.

That jumped out at me too. Previously I've read that they had met only once:

Drogheda Independent wrote:The family are also mystified at reports that he knows Mr Murat.They met once in a bar about two years ago

http://thesmithsighting.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/httpwww.html?m=1

by Searcher 20.10.13 11:02

Supposing Eggman, Pimpleman, Bundleman, Smithman are all illusions - either innocent parent(s) taking a child from the night creche [which should be logged], or didn't happen at all - and instead Madeleine was taken away from the apt. quietly, not alive, by the grey car, and possibly by a couple? Who had to dump jeans, fleece and shower curtain en route. En route to where? The boat which was taken out of the marina for the first time in two years on that night, owned 'by a British person'? Just my theory.

That suggestion could place the event - of an accident, overdose, whatever cause - earlier than the evening of 3 May. If the markings in the Renault are accurate, hired 25 days later, then such a move would have been only one move of at least two, temporarily. This suggestion would fit in with 'They've taken her'. It also leads to the question, who of the T9 were at the table when the cry went up?

by **Tony Bennett** 20.10.13 11:10

AndyB wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
Woofer wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Is there any evidence though that the Smiths (or some of them) were friendly with Robert Murat? Mr Smith Senior knew him by sight and that I thought was it.

I have to say that it is odd to me that they did not immediately recognise Gerry the next day (when the story broke) as the person they had seen before.

I'm not accusing them of lying - it's simply that I can't at the moment fathom their statements out.

P.S. According to the Daily Mirror, Woofer, the camera was at the hotel Estrela da Luz.
From Sky News 7.4.2008
"But Mr Smith is certain that the man he and his family saw that night was not Robert Murat, who is still officially an "arguido" in the Madeleine McCann investigation.
"I told police it was definitely not him because the man wasn't as big as Murat - I think I would have recognised him because I'd met him several times previously."

Thanks for the location of the CCTV camera NFWTD
SEVERAL TIMES.

Thank you Woofer, we are edging closer to the truth about Robert Murat and Martin Smith.
That jumped out at me too. Previously I've read that they had met only once:
Drogheda Independent wrote:The family are also mystified at reports that he knows Mr Murat.They met once in a bar about two years ago
http://thesmithsighting.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/httpwww.html?m=1

Andy B, Exactly right.

If we can't trust Martin Smith to be honest about his previous relationship with Robert Murat, what else can we trust him with?

Also, did Robert Murat already know the McCanns' co-ordinating lawyer, Freemason Edward Smethurst, whom we know to have holidayed with one or other of his families in an apartment in Praia da Luz ever since 1999?

by Smokeandmirrors 20.10.13 11:19

Praia is pretty small, and from experience, in these sorts of places English speaking people who own apartments do generally get to know each other, even at slight acquaintance level through going to the same bars/cafe's, supermarkets etc.

I would not rush to dismiss Smith on the basis he was acquainted to Murat, as that is not unexpected.

Instead, Gerry's response to "did you now Robert Murat" remains one of the huge red Gerry-flags.

Also, it is a significant matter that NONE of the MSM have loudly questioned WHY the McCanns never published the two Smith photofits when they have had hundreds of opportunities to do so over a five year period. They paid their PI's to come up with info, then spectacularly failed to use it in their "campaign".

by Eyei 20.10.13 11:21

winjoy wrote:http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/437948/Is-this-the-moment-of-Madeleine-McCann-s-kidnapping

The Sunday Express has all but revealed the truth - pretty good to see this in the MSM:clapping:

Well the day has come for something I never thought I would see - my Mother used to be a staunch 'Gerry and Kate can do no wrong' person but after seeing this article has completely changed her tune and now believes that they are not the saints she thought they were and wants to know more about the police files and the facts of Madeleine's disappearance.

The tide is definitely turning.

by **Tony Bennett** 20.10.13 11:47

Smokeandmirrors wrote:Also, it is a significant matter that NONE of the MSM have loudly questioned WHY the McCanns never published the two Smith photofits when they have had hundreds of opportunities to do so over a five year period.

And before Smith-man could be promoted, Redwood had to work out a way of getting rid of Tanner-man - and it took him 2.5 years.

He will have richly earned his soon-promotion to 'Chief Superintendent'

Where could "Smith-man" have been heading? (OR: Was there ever a "Smith-man"?)

Who is 'Smith-man'? (MULTIPLE CHOICE - You can vote for more than one answer)