SMITHMAN 2 - What can account for the 17 remarkable similarities between Tannerman and Smithman?

Cristobell wrote:

roy rovers wrote:But Christobell why at that time? Unless as you suggest it was a hastily arranged Plan B after Plan A had come unstuck. Which begs the question what was Plan A?

It may be that arrangements for the body to be moved earlier in the evening went awry.  Thrown perhaps by Gerry bumping into Jez?  Why was Jane (I carried her like this) Tanner hanging around in the street before all the shenanigans kicked off?  Jez saw her, she was dressed in purple.  Was she a look out? Was she waiting for someone?  The shutters weren't jemmied, so who failed to do their job? Kate had to open the window herself and the story they told their relatives did not fit with the scene found by the police.   

Imo, things started to go wrong as the evening progressed - anything could have thrown their plans adrift, from someone being held up, to a couple having a drink on balcony overlooking 5A, or a teenager sneaking outside for a crafty cigarette.  Perhaps they waiting for a phone call?  Whatever happened, I doubt running through the streets with a deceased child was part of the original plan.

I cant believe that G would carry a dead child through the streets of PdL over his shoulder. I can imagine him carrying a dead child concealed in a sports bag.  I suppose for me, I believe the dead child was long gone by 10pm that evening..

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

sharonl wrote:
But surely he would have taken precautions, waited until the early hours, wrapped her in a shawl, taken a buggy at the very least.  And, if she did die as stated, where were the blood stains that would have been in her hair?  Where was the smell of cadaver odour?  At least two things that Smith did not mention.

All my opinion: he didn't have time.  According to the statement of waiter J.R.Salcedas, people were already aware that a child was missing and gathering to begin a search when he heard a terrifying scream that he attributes to Kate.  My opinion is that it is possible that Gerry panicked and disposed of Madeleine's body, running in the opposite direction (westwards) to the search party that was assembling.  The key point for me is that when Salcedas heard the scream, the general public around the Ocean Club were already aware that Madeleine was missing.

He couldn,t wait till the early hours as they had to be in the tapas bar for the abduction idea to work.

The scream may have been KM seeing a now deceased Maddie being taken away by GM.Maddie having been removed from a nearby apartment but not 5a.

Châtelaine wrote:I'm tuning in late and haven't read the complete thread, but ... what kind of question is that to hold a poll ...?

Why are there 17 similarities between Tannerman and Smithman?

without the possibility to vote, that there are no 17 similarities?

I've been doing a lot of questionnaires and derived statistics from it. This poll reminds me of the very old joke we had about a question: "if yes, why not?"

Chatelaine, your point is well made, but, as the poll creator, here is your opportunity.

Here is my original list of similarities:

1. An unaccompanied male
2. Carrying a child and having no push-chair
3. The child was blonde
4. The child was a girl
5. The child was barefoot
6. The child was wearing light-coloured/pink pyjamas
7. She looked about four years old
8. She was being held on the man’s left side
9. She didn’t have a blanket or other covering
10. The men did not look like tourists
11. They were wearing a dark jacket
12. They were wearing light-coloured trousers
13. They were both about 1.75m to 1.8m tall (5’ 9” – 5’ 10”)
14. They were both aged 35-40
15. They were of average build
16. They were spotted within 600 yards of each other
17. In neither case could the man’s face be seen.

I fully accept the challenge and I would be very pleased if you could be as robust as you wish and tell me which ones of the 17 are NOT similar as between Tannerman and Smithman = thanks very much

cassius wrote:
He couldn,t wait till the early hours as they had to be in the tapas bar for the abduction idea to work.

The scream may have been KM seeing a now deceased Maddie being taken away by GM.Maddie having been removed from a nearby apartment but not 5a.

Or it could have been Kate discovering a deceased Maddie behind the sofa in 5A.

Châtelaine wrote:I'm tuning in late and haven't read the complete thread, but ... what kind of question is that to hold a poll ...?

Why are there 17 similarities between Tannerman and Smithman?

without the possibility to vote, that there are no 17 similarities?

I've been doing a lot of questionnaires and derived statistics from it. This poll reminds me of the very old joke we had about a question: "if yes, why not?"

When 63% of voters go for the option 'Some other reason', you know something's up.

Sorry to butt in here and go off topic. I know everyone is busy with these new developments but I have just discovered something very interesting. Please just take a look at my post on Hubbard.

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

cassius wrote:
He couldn,t wait till the early hours as they had to be in the tapas bar for the abduction idea to work.

The scream may have been KM seeing a now deceased Maddie being taken away by GM.Maddie having been removed from a nearby apartment but not 5a.

Or it could have been Kate discovering a deceased Maddie behind the sofa in 5A.

But Mrs Fenn heard nothing from the apartment below till 10.30 .The logic being 5a had been cleaned by now and MBM was  dead and elsewhere on the evening of 3rd may. imo

cassius wrote:

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

cassius wrote:
He couldn,t wait till the early hours as they had to be in the tapas bar for the abduction idea to work.

The scream may have been KM seeing a now deceased Maddie being taken away by GM.Maddie having been removed from a nearby apartment but not 5a.

Or it could have been Kate discovering a deceased Maddie behind the sofa in 5A.

But Mrs Fenn heard nothing from the apartment below till 10.30 .The logic being 5a had been cleaned by now and MBM was  dead and elsewhere on the evening of 3rd may. imo

But you are ignoring the statement of J.R.Salcedas, who described a terrifying scream. If we're to form a picture of what happened that evening from the statements of independent witnesses, we can't pick and choose which ones to include.

HelenMeg wrote:

Cristobell wrote:

roy rovers wrote:But Christobell why at that time? Unless as you suggest it was a hastily arranged Plan B after Plan A had come unstuck. Which begs the question what was Plan A?

It may be that arrangements for the body to be moved earlier in the evening went awry.  Thrown perhaps by Gerry bumping into Jez?  Why was Jane (I carried her like this) Tanner hanging around in the street before all the shenanigans kicked off?  Jez saw her, she was dressed in purple.  Was she a look out? Was she waiting for someone?  The shutters weren't jemmied, so who failed to do their job? Kate had to open the window herself and the story they told their relatives did not fit with the scene found by the police.   

Imo, things started to go wrong as the evening progressed - anything could have thrown their plans adrift, from someone being held up, to a couple having a drink on balcony overlooking 5A, or a teenager sneaking outside for a crafty cigarette.  Perhaps they waiting for a phone call?  Whatever happened, I doubt running through the streets with a deceased child was part of the original plan.

I cant believe that G would carry a dead child through the streets of PdL over his shoulder. I can imagine him carrying a dead child concealed in a sports bag.  I suppose for me, I believe the dead child was long gone by 10pm that evening..

I think we sometimes give the McCanns too much credit for their planning and organisational skills, but if we examine the story carefully we can see how slapdash the whole thing is.  We can only begin to imagine how high emotions must have been running in the aftermath of Madeleine's death and the terrible decision to get rid of the body.  It would have been rational to cover the body with a blanket or even to have placed it in a bag, but was he thinking rationally at the time?

Cristobell wrote:
I think we sometimes give the McCanns too much credit for their planning and organisational skills, but if we examine the story carefully we can see how slapdash the whole thing is.  We can only begin to imagine how high emotions must have been running in the aftermath of Madeleine's death and the terrible decision to get rid of the body.  It would have been rational to cover the body with a blanket or even to have placed it in a bag, but was he thinking rationally at the time?

Add to this that it is an argument from incredulity, a logical fallacy.  Just because something is hard to imagine doesn't mean that it is impossible.  People often say things like "I can't believe that eyes evolved without a designer", but it doesn't prove that there must have been a designer.

And I don't find it hard to imagine Gerry carrying a dead Madeleine.  Looking at the route he must have taken if he was indeed the subject of the Smith sighting, I wonder if he intended to dispose of the body in that wasteland just to the west of the Ocean Club apartments.  I've used Google Streetview to simulate walking that route, and although the images were taken in 2009, at that point there was boarding all around the patch of land.  He may have decided that he would have to chance a quick walk down the road, turn right towards the scrubland now being searched, and unfortunately for him he bumped into the Smith family. He would only have been searching for a hiding place for only a couple of minutes at most. And after the Smith sighting, another couple of minutes (or less) and he would have been in the scrubland, at the exact place where Scotland Yard are digging.

I'm not saying that this happened.  I'm saying that I can believe that it did.  And whether I or anyone else believes it or not, it is entirely possible.  Evidence has not rendered it impossible.

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

cassius wrote:

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

cassius wrote:
He couldn,t wait till the early hours as they had to be in the tapas bar for the abduction idea to work.

The scream may have been KM seeing a now deceased Maddie being taken away by GM.Maddie having been removed from a nearby apartment but not 5a.

Or it could have been Kate discovering a deceased Maddie behind the sofa in 5A.

But Mrs Fenn heard nothing from the apartment below till 10.30 .The logic being 5a had been cleaned by now and MBM was  dead and elsewhere on the evening of 3rd may. imo

But you are ignoring the statement of J.R.Salcedas, who described a terrifying scream.  If we're to form a picture of what happened that evening from the statements of independent witnesses, we can't pick and choose which ones to include.

So how does his evidence conflict with mrs fenn,s?He saw GM before 10pm and possibly heard KM scream.

The scream could have come from anywhere  and could have been contrived.

Here is my original list of similarities:

1. An unaccompanied male -
2. Carrying a child and having no push-chair- 
3. The child was blonde-
4. The child was a girl
5. The child was barefoot  
6. The child was wearing light-coloured/pink pyjamas
7. She looked about four years old  
8. She was being held on the man’s left side
9. She didn’t have a blanket or other covering
10. The men did not look like tourists  
11. They were wearing a dark jacket
12. They were wearing light-coloured trousers
13. They were both about 1.75m to 1.8m tall (5’ 9” – 5’ 10”)
14. They were both aged 35-40
15. They were of average build
16. They were spotted within 600 yards of each other
17. In neither case could the man’s face be seen.
 

I agree that there are many similarities and have voted other reasons, because all of the above are consistent with Gerry McCann realising the implications of the Smith sighting and suddenly needing an alibi for the time the balloon went up, when he was missing.

 Jez had been an independent witness but far too early, so poor Jane was called upon to describe her Tannerman of 9,15, who had to look very like Smithman, but not a Gerry double, so there was a tweak or two [ hair was one iirc, will check], face not described in detail.. well she wouldn't, would she?

 The 2 had to morph into each other, it was the police's job to wonder why an abductor was walking about with a child for 45 minutes.


 Jane didn't mention the buttons on the trousers, even though she saw Tannerman side-on. Managed to get the flowers on the pj bottoms in the dark,  though.


 So we agree on the similarities Tony but not for why they exist.

Can we account for Gerry's whereabouts after the alert was raised?

According to various statements from the PJ files:

- Waiter J.R.Salcedas sees Gerry "running to the pool and to the children's play area in the Tapas zone as if looking for someone. It immediately hit me that after talking to the older woman, that the little girl had not been found. I offered to alert the workers at the Millennium Restaurant and the man agreed. He then left again running to continue searching. I believe that this was between 21H30 and 22H00 but do not remember with certainty."

- Receptionist Ocean Club H. J. S. L. was on duty and was contacted by a member of staff from the Tapas Restaurant between 21.30 and 22.00 who informed him that the daughter of some guests who were dining there had disappeared. He immediately contacted the GNR in Lagos, shortly after this the child's father and John Hill arrived at the reception and he phoned the GNR again.

- After 22:00 R. R. S. B. and his wife were still sitting on the veranda in the B. family apartment. They heard noises downstairs and afterwards found out that a child had disappeared. Gerald was seen and spoken to by N.B. and R.R.S.B. They heard him calling for Madeleine when they were sitting on N.B.'s balcony, not far from the McCann's apartment. They both went down to talk to Gerald and helped in the search.

(The above must be Neil Berry and family. I cannot find Neil Berry's statement in the PJ files, only his rogatory interview, and that interview only refers back to the statement, giving no information. Also, the time is imprecise, 'after 22:00' could be any time).

And then nothing about Gerry until-

- Just after 22.30 upstairs neighbor Mrs. F. heard the hysterical shouts from a female person, calling out "we have let her down" which she repeated several times, quite upset. Mrs Fenn then saw that it was the mother of little Madeleine who was shouting furiously. Upon leaning over the terrace, after having seen the mother, Mrs. F. asked the father, Gerry, what was happening to which he replied that a small girl had been abducted. When asked, she replied that she did not leave her apartment, just spoke to Gerry from her balcony, which had a view over the terrace of the floor below. She found it strange that Gerry when said that a girl had been abducted, he did not mention that it was his daughter and that he did not mention any other scenarios. At that moment she offered Gerry help, saying that he could use her phone to contact the authorities, to which he replied that this had already been done. It was just after 22.30.

Now, I don't know about anybody else, but my expectations are that there should be many statements where people describe encountering the father of a missing child.

Add to this, that one of the handwritten timelines suggests that Gerry was not present when it was written. It says

Jerry 9-10 - 9-15 in tv room + all well
? did he check

So, Gerry was witnessed searching for Madeleine between 21:30 - 22:00 by multiple people. Then a witness hears a terrifying scream that he attributes to Kate, and Gerry goes off the radar until Mrs Fenn speaks to him at 22:30.

Among other things, this also suggests that the alarm was raised earlier than was claimed.

The witness statement of Neil Berry is of great importance but it doesn't appear to be in the PJ files, please do correct me if I'm wrong.

Still can,t see why you say KM  screams in 5a when she comes across MBM.Mrs Fenn would have mentioned it if it had happened in the flat below her.

cassius wrote:
Still can,t see why you say KM  screams in 5a when she comes across MBM.Mrs Fenn would have mentioned it if it had happened in the flat below her.

Who knows?  My mother isn't as old as Mrs Fenn was back then* but she can sleep through anything. (*Yeah, I know she has sadly passed away since.)

It's my opinion cassius, I'm not here to convince anyone else.

More important to me is that Gerry disappeared off the radar for a significant amount of time, and could have been missing at the time of the Smith sighting.

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

cassius wrote:
Still can,t see why you say KM  screams in 5a when she comes across MBM.Mrs Fenn would have mentioned it if it had happened in the flat below her.

Who knows?  My mother isn't as old as Mrs Fenn was back then* but she can sleep through anything. (*Yeah, I know she has sadly passed away since.)

It's my opinion cassius, I'm not here to convince anyone else.

More important to me is that Gerry disappeared off the radar for a significant amount of time, and could have been missing at the time of the Smith sighting.

Indeed.Fwiw for me GM is Smithman.

@whatliesbehindthesofa 
 
Of course I think you're right that the alarm had already been raised before the famous 10 pmish moment. What I don't understand from your theory, and it's late is my easy excuse, this scream heard by the waiter, are you suggesting Kate found Madeleine dead after the actual raising of the alarm?

MarcoG wrote:@whatliesbehindthesofa 
 
Of course I think you're right that the alarm had already been raised before the famous 10 pmish moment. What I don't understand from your theory, and it's late is my easy excuse, this scream heard by the waiter, are you suggesting Kate found Madeleine dead after the actual raising of the alarm?

It's more that I consider it a possibility rather than a theory that I prefer to the exclusion of all others.  In the absence of further evidence I've accepted not knowing what happened that evening :)

I recognize the possibility that Kate discovered that Madeleine was missing, the alert was raised and searches began, and then she found her dead body behind the sofa, provoking her to scream as described by Salcedas.  As cassius rightly points out, the weakness in this is that Mrs Fenn did not describe a scream.  However, Salcedas did, but we don't know from where he heard the scream.  I only suggest that it may have been in 5A because the dogs detected behind the sofa, which seems an unusual place to temporarily keep the body.  As Amaral said in his documentary, "as a policeman this must be the place of death", although I'm paraphrasing there as I'm writing that purely from memory.  It is entirely correct that we need to explain why Mrs Fenn did not hear the scream.  There is the possibility that the scream originated from another location - but this must have been some distance from 5A.  Or the possibility that I suggested, that like my own mother is wont to do at the drop of a hat, Mrs Fenn may have been asleep.

For me it would explain how someone could take the risk of carrying a dead body through the streets.  It creates urgency and the requirement for a instant decision - hide the body, or be discovered, as a public search had already begun.  As to why the body had to be hidden, there is no evidence to indicate this, except in my opinion that both twins appear to have been sedated, so there is the possibility that Madeleine also was sedated.

All of the above, obviously my opinion only, and I'm not discounting any of the 'death before the 3rd' theories.  They're all possible.

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

MarcoG wrote:@whatliesbehindthesofa 
 
Of course I think you're right that the alarm had already been raised before the famous 10 pmish moment. What I don't understand from your theory, and it's late is my easy excuse, this scream heard by the waiter, are you suggesting Kate found Madeleine dead after the actual raising of the alarm?

It's more that I consider it a possibility rather than a theory that I prefer to the exclusion of all others.  In the absence of further evidence I've accepted not knowing what happened that evening :)

I recognize the possibility that Kate discovered that Madeleine was missing, the alert was raised and searches began, and then she found her dead body behind the sofa, provoking her to scream as described by Salcedas.  As cassius rightly points out, the weakness in this is that Mrs Fenn did not describe a scream.  However, Salcedas did, but we don't know from where he heard the scream.  I only suggest that it may have been in 5A because the dogs detected behind the sofa, which seems an unusual place to temporarily keep the body.  As Amaral said in his documentary, "as a policeman this must be the place of death", although I'm paraphrasing there as I'm writing that purely from memory.  It is entirely correct that we need to explain why Mrs Fenn did not hear the scream.  There is the possibility that the scream originated from another location - but this must have been some distance from 5A.  Or the possibility that I suggested, that like my own mother is wont to do at a drop of a hat, Mrs Fenn may have been asleep.

For me it would explain how someone could take the risk of carrying a dead body through the streets.  It creates urgency and the requirement for a instant decision - hide the body, or be discovered, as a public search had already begun.  As to why the body had to be hidden, there is no evidence to indicate this, except in my opinion that both twins appear to have been sedated, so there is the possibility that Madeleine also was sedated.

All of the above, obviously my opinion only, and I'm not discounting any of the 'death before the 3rd' theories.  They're all possible.

Interesting and original thought, though not necessarily your theory. I've never thought of that possibility before, thinking like that makes the alarm of the disappearance possible as a genuine one, and all that followed an adrenaline-fueled charade.*
 
I have lots of buts, but too late at night now, thanks for elaborating.
 
*All speculation on my part, fantasy, fiction, purporting stuff undsoweiter please don't sue me carteruk.

Tony Bennett wrote:

Châtelaine wrote:I'm tuning in late and haven't read the complete thread, but ... what kind of question is that to hold a poll ...?

Why are there 17 similarities between Tannerman and Smithman?

without the possibility to vote, that there are no 17 similarities?

I've been doing a lot of questionnaires and derived statistics from it. This poll reminds me of the very old joke we had about a question: "if yes, why not?"

Chatelaine, your point is well made, but, as the poll creator, here is your opportunity.

Here is my original list of similarities:

1. An unaccompanied male
2. Carrying a child and having no push-chair
3. The child was blonde
4. The child was a girl
5. The child was barefoot
6. The child was wearing light-coloured/pink pyjamas
7. She looked about four years old
8. She was being held on the man’s left side
9. She didn’t have a blanket or other covering
10. The men did not look like tourists
11. They were wearing a dark jacket
12. They were wearing light-coloured trousers
13. They were both about 1.75m to 1.8m tall (5’ 9” – 5’ 10”)
14. They were both aged 35-40
15. They were of average build
16. They were spotted within 600 yards of each other
17. In neither case could the man’s face be seen.

I fully accept the challenge and I would be very pleased if you could be as robust as you wish and tell me which ones of the 17 are NOT similar as between Tannerman and Smithman = thanks very much

Chatelaine, I hope you might find time today to answer my point above in bold.

I took great care, looking at all the Jane Tanner statements and then those of the three Smiths, to list all the 17 similarities, and if you think even one of them is incorrect, I would like to know from you, and have the opportunity then of responding to you. Many thanks

russiandoll wrote:Here is my original list of similarities:

1. An unaccompanied male -
2. Carrying a child and having no push-chair- 
3. The child was blonde-
4. The child was a girl
5. The child was barefoot  
6. The child was wearing light-coloured/pink pyjamas
7. She looked about four years old  
8. She was being held on the man’s left side
9. She didn’t have a blanket or other covering
10. The men did not look like tourists  
11. They were wearing a dark jacket
12. They were wearing light-coloured trousers
13. They were both about 1.75m to 1.8m tall (5’ 9” – 5’ 10”)
14. They were both aged 35-40
15. They were of average build
16. They were spotted within 600 yards of each other
17. In neither case could the man’s face be seen.
 

I agree that there are many similarities and have voted other reasons, because all of the above are consistent with Gerry McCann realising the implications of the Smith sighting and suddenly needing an alibi for the time the balloon went up, when he was missing.

Jez had been an independent witness but far too early, so poor Jane was called upon to describe her Tannerman of 9.15, who had to look very like Smithman, but not a Gerry double, so there was a tweak or two [hair was one iirc, will check], face not described in detail..,well she wouldn't, would she?

The 2 had to morph into each other, it was the police's job to wonder why an abductor was walking about with a child for 45 minutes.

Jane didn't mention the buttons on the trousers, even though she saw Tannerman side-on. Managed to get the flowers on the pj bottoms in the dark,  though.

So we agree on the similarities Tony but not for why they exist.

We actually agree not only that there were these 17 similarities but we also agree that one description was copied from the other.

My hypothesis is that the Smiths simply replicated Jane Tanner's description, adding: 'But the abductor wasn't Robert Murat'.

Yours runs I think like this:

1. Madeleine was dead.

2. Gerry decided to make a run for it, carrying Madeleine's body through the streets of Praia da Luz to...well, somewhere.

3. The alarm was due to be raised by Kate (or someone else) at about 10.00pm or just before.

4. Gerry was suddenly spotted by 9 Irish people and said to himself: "B*gger. That's torn it.

5. He hurriedly deposited Madeleine's body somewhere, then dashed back to the Ocean Club.

6. Whereupon he got hold of Jane Tanner and said: 'Look, make up a description of someone you saw, say about 9.15pm - to give me time to be seen by the Irish people at 10.00pm. But, you know, tweak it a bit here and there, hair colour or something, so they don't think it's me'.

And we have to bear in mind that there are several witnesses who confirm that Gerry McCann was in the vicinity of the Ocean Club during, say, the period 9.30pm to 10.30pm, when you say he was rushing around Praia da Luz with a dead body.

I shall exercise due restraint and refrain from commenting on your idea

Not just a dead body but presumably a fresh corpse.

No smell of a cadaver?

No blood stains in her hair, on her skin or on the man?

In her Pyjamas?  What time did she die?  before or after her bath?

No blanket to cover her body and hide any signs of blood or other indications that she was not alive?

A corpse would be quite heavy and awkward to carry wouldn't it?

According to the Smith family, this man was acting perfectly normal and did not really draw attention to himself.  Was he really in a rush?  If he did hurry past the Smith family, how were they able to give such a detailed description of both the man and the child?

sharonl wrote:Not just a dead body but presumably a fresh corpse.

No smell of a cadaver?

No blood stains in her hair, on her skin or on the man?

In her Pyjamas?  What time did she die?  before or after her bath?

No blanket to cover her body and hide any signs of blood or other indications that she was not alive?

A corpse would be quite heavy and awkward to carry wouldn't it?

According to the Smith family, this man was acting perfectly normal and did not really draw attention to himself.  Was he really in a rush?  If he did hurry past the Smith family, how were they able to give such a detailed description of both the man and the child?

Yes, but none of these issues make the situation impossible.

sharonl wrote:
A corpse would be quite heavy and awkward to carry wouldn't it?

Surely it would be roughly the same weight as a live child.

As for awkward carrying, Martin Smith stated  "that he did not hold the child in a comfortable position, suggesting [the carrying] not being habitual."

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

sharonl wrote:Not just a dead body but presumably a fresh corpse.

No smell of a cadaver?

No blood stains in her hair, on her skin or on the man?

In her Pyjamas?  What time did she die?  before or after her bath?

No blanket to cover her body and hide any signs of blood or other indications that she was not alive?

A corpse would be quite heavy and awkward to carry wouldn't it?

According to the Smith family, this man was acting perfectly normal and did not really draw attention to himself.  Was he really in a rush?  If he did hurry past the Smith family, how were they able to give such a detailed description of both the man and the child?

Yes, but none of these issues make the situation impossible.

Ok, but the dogs found blood and cadaver odour in the apartment

If the Smiths could give such a detailed description of what they saw (assuming that it was Gerry & Madeleine) why did they not notice the smell of cadaver and blood stains?

sharonl wrote:
Ok, but the dogs found blood and cadaver odour in the apartment

If the Smiths could give such a detailed description of what they saw (assuming that it was Gerry & Madeleine) why did they not notice the smell of cadaver and blood stains?

You could equally ask why the GNR didn't smell cadaver odour or blood in the apartment, which was a closed space where smells linger as opposed to the open space of the street where the Smiths encountered Smithman.

Tony I told you on another thread where you addressed my explanation that I neither named MADELEINE in it, I did not state when she died nor did I say Gerry deposited her somewhere in PdL before returning to the tapas bar.

 I am glad that you are no longer going to comment on what I said, that is twice now that you have added things to my post claiming these came from me.

 They are your interpretations of what I said.

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

sharonl wrote:
Ok, but the dogs found blood and cadaver odour in the apartment

If the Smiths could give such a detailed description of what they saw (assuming that it was Gerry & Madeleine) why did they not notice the smell of cadaver and blood stains?

You could equally ask why the GNR didn't smell cadaver odour or blood in the apartment, which was a closed space where smells linger as opposed to the open space of the street where the Smiths encountered Smithman.

The odour would have been less noticeable to humans after a period of time.  The apartment had also been cleaned to the extent that even the curtains had been washed.  I cannot see how all this cleaning took place between 5.30pm and 8.00pm ( a maximum of 2.5 hrs) that night, it just doesn't seem possible, especially when there were other things to tend to.  If Madeleine had died and been removed earlier in the week, then the odour would have been even less noticeable.  Even Michael Wright admitted that there was a dreadful smell from the hire car. 

Goncalo Amaral claimed that the cadaver had been frozen. So where exactly was Gerry heading with Madeleine?  Surely the Smith family would have noticed if she had already been frozen?

Sorry to be negative about this but it doesn't make sense

sharonl wrote:

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

sharonl wrote:
Ok, but the dogs found blood and cadaver odour in the apartment

If the Smiths could give such a detailed description of what they saw (assuming that it was Gerry & Madeleine) why did they not notice the smell of cadaver and blood stains?

You could equally ask why the GNR didn't smell cadaver odour or blood in the apartment, which was a closed space where smells linger as opposed to the open space of the street where the Smiths encountered Smithman.

The odour would have been less noticeable to humans after a period of time.  The apartment had also been cleaned to the extent that even the curtains had been washed.  I cannot see how all this cleaning took place between 5.30pm and 8.00pm ( a maximum of 2.5 hrs) that night, it just doesn't seem possible, especially when there were other things to tend to.  If Madeleine had died and been removed earlier in the week, then the odour would have been even less noticeable.  Even Michael Wright admitted that there was a dreadful smell from the hire car. 

Goncalo Amaral claimed that the cadaver had been frozen. So where exactly was Gerry heading with Madeleine?  Surely the Smith family would have noticed if she had already been frozen?

Sorry to be negative about this but it doesn't make sense

When Madeleine was first moved from the apartment, there was probably no detectable odour (to the human nose).

Goncalo Amaral, I believe claims that Madeleine was frozen during the period between May and the end of June, when she was moved in the car.  I think she was moved to a permanent resting place once the Mark Harrison searches were completed.

whatliesbehindthesofa wrote:

sharonl wrote:
A corpse would be quite heavy and awkward to carry wouldn't it?

Surely it would be roughly the same weight as a live child.

As for awkward carrying, Martin Smith stated  "that he did not hold the child in a comfortable position, suggesting [the carrying] not being habitual."

Martin Smith did not say that WLBTS - those words are Kate's.  She changed what he said just as she changed the position in which the man was carrying the child to connect it to the cackhanded way in which Jane Tanner's 'abductor' was carrying the child.