Re: The TIME of the alleged Smith Sighting & the Till Receipts that don't Tally?

by MaryB 08.11.13 12:57

I think the Smith sighting was important. But I don't know. I wonder if there will be updates from the Crimewatch as is usual. But I'm not hopeful. What about the two men seen arguing in loud voices. Nobody seems to be interested in them. Or are they yet another red herring.

by Liz Eagles 08.11.13 12:58

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:In view of the bonkers story from earlier in the year - apparently sparked by the equally bonkers Graham Perry - about Madeleine being in the former USSR, I'm betting on a dead Russian husky sledge driver as the next stooge!

You'll not see dogs mentioned NFWTD. No, none of those images of reliable dogs will ever be entertained.

It's much easier to blame nasty ethnic minorities (which does make me giggle as Brits are an ethnic minority in Portugal). big grin

by chillyheat 08.11.13 12:58

Clay Regazzoni wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Unchained Melody (love the song, by the way!) yes I certainly have my doubts about it but I'm going down the "mistaken" route rather than anything more sinister.
I don't see how it matters either way. It's not so important to finding out what happened as people think, in my opinion, and might actually be a bit of a blind alley diverting attention from more important issues.

I agree with this statement....I believe we have been steered away from what happened at the OC. And I don't mean that from posters on here but by spin

Why SY keep saying the McCanns are not suspects needs to be looked at a bit more closely as to why.

by TheTruthWillOut 08.11.13 13:01

Reading the last few pages has got me wondering...could this sighting simply be a "revenge" sighting as payback to the Tapas 9 for implicating Murat? Sorry if I missed this theory earlier.

I hope it isn't, but nothing would shock me in this case anymore ( besides the utter selfishness with a little girl missing)

by Guest 08.11.13 13:01

Aquila, okay, make that a vodka-sodden troika driver.

by unchained melody 08.11.13 13:06

Any member of the Smith family should have contacted the police on the 4th. It was all over the news and they claimed to have seen a small blonde girl being carried that night. I don't believe they wouldn't think it not worthy of reporting.

by Liz Eagles 08.11.13 13:08

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Aquila, okay, make that a vodka-sodden troika driver.

Yes, the one with a family living in squalor, working in the tourist industry for a euro per day, dealing in drugs (perhaps cocaine), speaking three languages, owning several mobile phones, having access to hidden computer linkage and completely unknown to the Portuguese plod!

I lived on a Greek island for a few years - OK it's not Portugal but let me tell you that there isn't much the local plod don't know about. There isn't much the local people don't know about either.

Olive trees have eyes as we used to say.

That's why I believe Amaral.

by **tigger** 08.11.13 13:13

TheTruthWillOut wrote:Reading the last few pages has got me wondering...could this sighting simply be a "revenge" sighting as payback to the Tapas 9 for implicating Murat? Sorry if I missed this theory earlier.

I hope it isn't, but nothing would shock me in this case anymore ( besides the utter selfishness with a little girl missing)

No, it's a new one on me, but you're welcome to believe that although it opens up a new and terrible vista of other statements having been submitted for the same reasons. splat

by **Tony Bennett** 08.11.13 13:20

TheTruthWillOut wrote:Reading the last few pages has got me wondering...could this sighting simply be a "revenge" sighting as payback to the Tapas 9 for implicating Murat? Sorry if I missed this theory earlier.

I hope it isn't, but nothing would shock me in this case anymore ( besides the utter selfishness with a little girl missing)

People have been asking what possible motive Martin Smith could have had for fabricating a sighting - an idea that, as I fully appreciate, most people have trouble coming to terms with.

It is a fact that Martin Smith knew Murat.

It is a fact that Martin Smith owns an apartment in Praia da Luz in the Estrala da Luz complex.

We do not know for how long i.e. for how many years.

There is evidence that Martin Smith has minimised his degree of acquaintance with Murat.

It is a fact that Murat was made an arguido on 14 May.

It is fact that on 15 and 16 May, the following members of the Tapas 7 all made statements (which they have since retracted( claiming (falsely) that they saw Murat hanging around near the Ocean Club the night Madeleine was reported missing:

Rachael Oldfield/Mamphilly
Russell O'Brien
Fiona Payne

It is reported as a fact (and I believe it to be so) that neither Martin Smith nor any member of his family did anything about reporting their 'sighting' until 16 May, when they 'phoned the PJ.

It is a fact that when Martin Smith was interviewed by the PJ in Portugal on 26 May, he was able to say that the man with child that he says he saw was not Robert Murat.

I guess as amateur sleuths it is up to us to work out what all this might mean.

by Okeydokey 08.11.13 13:30

TheTruthWillOut wrote:Reading the last few pages has got me wondering...could this sighting simply be a "revenge" sighting as payback to the Tapas 9 for implicating Murat? Sorry if I missed this theory earlier.

I hope it isn't, but nothing would shock me in this case anymore ( besides the utter selfishness with a little girl missing)

Only problem seems to be that they didn't immediately identify the person as G McC - that came much later - in the autumn I think.

by Guest 08.11.13 13:31

Yes, when they saw him returning to the U K after being declared to be an arguido.

by OpenMind 08.11.13 13:31

Tony Bennett wrote:
People have been asking what possible motive Martin Smith could have had for fabricating a sighting - an idea that, as I fully appreciate, most people have trouble coming to terms with.

It is a fact that Martin Smith knew Murat.

It is a fact that Martin Smith owns an apartment in Praia da Luz in the Estrala da Luz complex.

We do not know for how long i.e. for how many years.

There is evidence that Martin Smith has minimised his degree of acquaintance with Murat.

It is a fact that Murat was made an arguido on 14 May.

It is fact that on 15 and 16 May, the following members of the Tapas 7 all made statements (which they have since retracted( claiming (falsely) that they saw Murat hanging around near the Ocean Club the night Madeleine was reported missing:

Rachael Oldfield/Mamphilly
Russell O'Brien
Fiona Payne

It is reported as a fact (and I believe it to be so) that neither Martin Smith nor any member of his family did anything about reporting their 'sighting' until 16 May, when they 'phoned the PJ.

It is a fact that when Martin Smith was interviewed by the PJ in Portugal on 26 May, he was able to say that the man with child that he says he saw was not Robert Murat.

I guess as amateur sleuths it is up to us to work out what all this might mean.

How did I not know some of this?

Thanks Tony, has always believed the Smith sighting, so many people etc. Not so sure now!

by Okeydokey 08.11.13 13:39

Before we disappear down too many rabbit holes, can someone give a citation for the Smiths knowing Murat? I think I've seen the claim before, but not the evidence for that being the case.

by RIPM 08.11.13 13:47

Tony Bennett wrote:
TheTruthWillOut wrote:Reading the last few pages has got me wondering...could this sighting simply be a "revenge" sighting as payback to the Tapas 9 for implicating Murat? Sorry if I missed this theory earlier.

I hope it isn't, but nothing would shock me in this case anymore ( besides the utter selfishness with a little girl missing)
People have been asking what possible motive Martin Smith could have had for fabricating a sighting - an idea that, as I fully appreciate, most people have trouble coming to terms with.

It is a fact that Martin Smith knew Murat.

It is a fact that Martin Smith owns an apartment in Praia da Luz in the Estrala da Luz complex.

We do not know for how long i.e. for how many years.

There is evidence that Martin Smith has minimised his degree of acquaintance with Murat.

It is a fact that Murat was made an arguido on 14 May.

It is fact that on 15 and 16 May, the following members of the Tapas 7 all made statements (which they have since retracted( claiming (falsely) that they saw Murat hanging around near the Ocean Club the night Madeleine was reported missing:

Rachael Oldfield/Mamphilly
Russell O'Brien
Fiona Payne

It is reported as a fact (and I believe it to be so) that neither Martin Smith nor any member of his family did anything about reporting their 'sighting' until 16 May, when they 'phoned the PJ.

It is a fact that when Martin Smith was interviewed by the PJ in Portugal on 26 May, he was able to say that the man with child that he says he saw was not Robert Murat.

I guess as amateur sleuths it is up to us to work out what all this might mean.

Can you inform us on what date and where RO, ROb and FP retracted their statements implicating Murat as being outside 5a on 3rd May.

If Smith was there to give an alibi for Murat why do you believe he would involve his whole family ,surely him and say his eldest son would be enough. The more people involved in anything, particularly young children made to lie, the harder it is to cover up.He told it as it was that night.

by Daisy 08.11.13 13:49

Okeydokey wrote:Before we disappear down too many rabbit holes, can someone give a citation for the Smiths knowing Murat? I think I've seen the claim before, but not the evidence for that being the case.

"... Adds that in May and August of 2006, he saw ROBERT MURAT in Praia da Luz bars. On one of these occasions, the first, he was inebriated and spoke to everyone. He did not wear glasses at that time. He also states that the individual who carried the child was not ROBERT. He would have recognised him immediately."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

MS
"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.
"He was wearing beige trousers and a darker top. We all put him in his early 40s and I didn't think he was Portuguese."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by jeanmonroe 08.11.13 13:49

Tony Bennett
One other very important point.
Redwood has confirmed that Jane Tanner was right.
He has, he claims, identified crecheman, who was wearing the same clothes and carrying the same description of a child wearing the same pyjamas etc.
.................................................................
Well, i have two saved recordings of DCI Redwood.

In the first one he says 'with a child wearing pyjamas'
In the second he says 'with a child POSSIBLY wearing pyjamas'
...................................................
Tony Bennett

"That Smith sighting and those two efits of two different blokes from a family who never saw his face.........."
...............................................

HOW is it at all possible for Mr Smith to even produce/collaborate on ONE e-fit, let alone TWO, of somebody's FACE he has admitted to have never SEEN?

Unless, as stated, he was TOLD, somehow BEFORE doing his e-fits.

As NONE of the Smith family say they saw the e-fit man's 'face' why and HOW did they come up with 'this was the man'?

Just why he, Mr Smith, hasn't been shouting from the rooftops that 'he definitely was NOT a tall BLACK fella'...... is anybody's guess.

by sallypelt 08.11.13 13:50

“It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.” Carl Sagan spit coffee

by sallypelt 08.11.13 13:53

Why are people connected the e-fits with the Smiths? Has it been stated, OFFICIALLY, that they are E-fits given by the Smith's family?

by Joss 08.11.13 13:55

I am wondering what the link is between Smith & Murat as to how well they really knew each other and in what capacity? My guess is they knew each other very well If Martin was willing to stick his neck out for Murat to give him an alibi? And then how could Martin be so certain who they saw if it was such a vague description of the man they supposedly saw to know it was not Murat? But if it was only to cover for Murat that they saw some mystery man carrying a small child, and they fabricated that man to get Murat off the hook? Dunno.

by Liz Eagles 08.11.13 13:59

The thing that strikes me is that whilst the McCanns have their website (£37k publicly funded and rarely updated) asking for information (and please look at the confidentiality arrangements on that) and whilst Scotland Yard have done a Crimewatch spectacular and whilst the Portuguese police are now asking for judicial secrecy there is no advantage for anyone with information to come forward other than to have their lives picked over with a fish fork.

Scotland Yard need to sort this out imo and they can start by closing down the findmadeleine website's private number to appeal for information.

As I understand things the McCanns have their wish to re-open the case in Portugal. The McCanns were granted their wish for the Met to do an independent review.

What the hell is wrong with Scotland Yard now telling the McCanns to close their own 'helpline' and telling everyone that ALL information must go through the Yard?

by Estelle 08.11.13 14:03

Joss wrote:I am wondering what the link is between Smith & Murat as to how well they really knew each other and in what capacity? My guess is they knew each other very well If Martin was willing to stick his neck out for Murat to give him an alibi? And then how could Martin be so certain who they saw if it was such a vague description of the man they supposedly saw to know it was not Murat? But if it was only to cover for Murat that they saw some mystery man carrying a small child, and they fabricated that man to get Murat off the hook? Dunno.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 08.11.13 14:09

Just two points. First about the point of view that the police would not lead a witness about who they had seen..........

Witness Statement

Adriaan Jacobus Van Marais

Date: 2007/11/16

Profession: Head of Personnel

Place of Work: Golfinho Restaurant, P da L

When questioned he said that he does not know Robert Murat. He never saw him personally. He has just seen him on television. When asked he says that he does not remember having seen him that night helping in the searches.

Second Point regarding the police asking the question about looking like a tourist, well, another independent witness says the same about a suspicious individual (not the sighting), therefore he must have been asked the question...........

This person did not seem to him to be a tourist or an inhabitant of the village. He describes the individual as being male, white, but with sun-tanned skin, aged about 30. He was about 1.70 ? 1.80 tall and had a normal physical appearance. He remembers that he had dark coloured hair, a little gathered at the back but not covering his neck totally. He does not remember whether he ever saw him with glasses, but knows that he did not have a beard or moustache. He does not remember any other details

Above from the statement of Head of Personnel Golfinho Restaurant

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by TheTruthWillOut 08.11.13 14:13

Tony Bennett wrote:People have been asking what possible motive Martin Smith could have had for fabricating a sighting - an idea that, as I fully appreciate, most people have trouble coming to terms with.

It is a fact that Martin Smith knew Murat.

It is a fact that Martin Smith owns an apartment in Praia da Luz in the Estrala da Luz complex.

We do not know for how long i.e. for how many years.

There is evidence that Martin Smith has minimised his degree of acquaintance with Murat.

It is a fact that Murat was made an arguido on 14 May.

It is fact that on 15 and 16 May, the following members of the Tapas 7 all made statements (which they have since retracted( claiming (falsely) that they saw Murat hanging around near the Ocean Club the night Madeleine was reported missing:

Rachael Oldfield/Mamphilly
Russell O'Brien
Fiona Payne

It is reported as a fact (and I believe it to be so) that neither Martin Smith nor any member of his family did anything about reporting their 'sighting' until 16 May, when they 'phoned the PJ.

It is a fact that when Martin Smith was interviewed by the PJ in Portugal on 26 May, he was able to say that the man with child that he says he saw was not Robert Murat.

I guess as amateur sleuths it is up to us to work out what all this might mean.

So you largely agree with my suggestion then? (I understand you have to be very careful) It could be that the family did see a man carrying a kid sometime on the evening of the 3rd and after Murat was implicated he wanted to help a friend. I will try to think about this more... thinking

So now if we eliminate this sighting along with the Tanner sighting we are back to square one with the Tapas 9 at dinner doing checks every few minutes around the apartment complex and yet a girl disappears without a trace.

I would really like to hear the latest theory from any of you long time sleuths because I'm completely stumped once again. flag

by jeanmonroe 08.11.13 14:14

aquila wrote:The thing that strikes me is that whilst the McCanns have their website (£37k publicly funded and rarely updated) asking for information (and please look at the confidentiality arrangements on that) and whilst Scotland Yard have done a Crimewatch spectacular and whilst the Portuguese police are now asking for judicial secrecy there is no advantage for anyone with information to come forward other than to have their lives picked over with a fish fork.

Scotland Yard need to sort this out imo and they can start by closing down the findmadeleine website's private number to appeal for information.

As I understand things the McCanns have their wish to re-open the case in Portugal. The McCanns were granted their wish for the Met to do an independent review.

What the hell is wrong with Scotland Yard now telling the McCanns to close their own 'helpline' and telling everyone that ALL information must go through the Yard?

TANNERMAN IS STILL BEING PROMOTED ON THEIR WEBSITE, RIGHT NOW!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

WHY HASN'T SY/MET CLOSED THIS DOWN AS IT HAS BEEN COMPLETELY DIMISSED, BY THEM, THE ELITES, AS A 'REAL' SIGHTING OF AN ABDUCTOR?

WHY ARE SY/MET ALLOWING THIS 'FALSE' ABDUCTOR DESCRIPTION TO STILL BE PROMOTED BY THE MCCANNS AS A PERSON OF INTEREST?

25 DAYS AFTER DISMISSING IT AS A FALSE 'SIGHTING'!

by Joss 08.11.13 14:14

Estelle wrote:
Joss wrote:I am wondering what the link is between Smith & Murat as to how well they really knew each other and in what capacity? My guess is they knew each other very well If Martin was willing to stick his neck out for Murat to give him an alibi? And then how could Martin be so certain who they saw if it was such a vague description of the man they supposedly saw to know it was not Murat? But if it was only to cover for Murat that they saw some mystery man carrying a small child, and they fabricated that man to get Murat off the hook? Dunno.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Estelle, Thankyou for posting the link. I had a quick read and will study it further. Wow it's all very convoluted as to all the different links to different people, interesting.

by Joss 08.11.13 14:20

If there was no abduction then there are no suspects.

by Mirage 08.11.13 14:22

aquila wrote:The thing that strikes me is that whilst the McCanns have their website (£37k publicly funded and rarely updated) asking for information (and please look at the confidentiality arrangements on that) and whilst Scotland Yard have done a Crimewatch spectacular and whilst the Portuguese police are now asking for judicial secrecy there is no advantage for anyone with information to come forward other than to have their lives picked over with a fish fork.

Scotland Yard need to sort this out imo and they can start by closing down the findmadeleine website's private number to appeal for information.

As I understand things the McCanns have their wish to re-open the case in Portugal. The McCanns were granted their wish for the Met to do an independent review.

What the hell is wrong with Scotland Yard now telling the McCanns to close their own 'helpline' and telling everyone that ALL information must go through the Yard?

BUMP!

by Estelle 08.11.13 14:26

Daisy wrote:
Okeydokey wrote:Before we disappear down too many rabbit holes, can someone give a citation for the Smiths knowing Murat? I think I've seen the claim before, but not the evidence for that being the case.
"... Adds that in May and August of 2006, he saw ROBERT MURAT in Praia da Luz bars. On one of these occasions, the first, he was inebriated and spoke to everyone. He did not wear glasses at that time. He also states that the individual who carried the child was not ROBERT. He would have recognised him immediately."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

MS
"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.
"He was wearing beige trousers and a darker top. We all put him in his early 40s and I didn't think he was Portuguese."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Here MS is saying he did not think he was "Portuguese" therefore he must be a tourist! So what about the large British ex-pat community who live there and are locals? Also, at night, most men would wear long trousers and a jacket, surely!

by jeanmonroe 08.11.13 14:28

TheTruthWillOut
So now if we eliminate this sighting along with the Tanner sighting we are back to square one with the Tapas 9 at dinner doing checks every few minutes around the apartment complex and yet a girl disappears without a trace.

I would really like to hear the latest theory from any of you long time sleuths because I'm completely stumped once again.
.....................................................................................................
There has never been, and there isn't a scintilla of ANY 'evidence', of an 'abduction'.

ONLY the SAY SO of the McCanns themselves and their 'friends' (especially DP)

They, the McCanns, have never, ever, PRODUCED a minutest piece of 'evidence' that an 'abduction' occurred.

Even though they have, supposedly, spent an absolute 'fortune' with their own 'investigators'

With the result being the McCanns and their 'PI's' have not produced a single ATOM of 'evidence' to support their 'claim' that Madeleine WAS 'abducted'.

GERRY MCCANN WAS THE LAST PERSON TO ADMIT SEEING A 'LIVE' MADELEINE, IN HER BED, SO HE SAYS, AT HIS 'CHECK' AT 9.05pm 3rd May 2007.

by **Tony Bennett** 08.11.13 14:32

RIPM wrote:
Tony Bennett wrote:
It is fact that on 15 and 16 May, the following members of the Tapas 7 all made statements (which they have since retracted( claiming (falsely) that they saw Murat hanging around near the Ocean Club the night Madeleine was reported missing:

Rachael Oldfield/Mamphilly
Russell O'Brien
Fiona Payne

Can you inform us on what date and where RO, RO'B and FP retracted their statements implicating Murat as being outside 5a on 3rd May.

Ah! RIPM! I thought it wouldn't be long before you asked me a tricky question. You joined on 17th October and have been busy on the 'Smith' threads. It has taken you 21 days. Longer than I expected.

Please don't read too much into what I have written above, and it is certainly not meant in any way to be sarcastic.

Certainly not, as I suspect that you have a very great deal of knowledge about this case, possibly a great deal more than we think.

In actual fact, you have asked a very good question (consistent with someone with a great deal of knowledge about this case).

You asked on what date and where exactly did RO, RO'B and FP retract their statements implicating Murat being outside G5A .

The answer is very instructive.

I have in fact provided an answer to that very question in my 120-page article on Robert Murat. If you've either not read that yet, or you can't find it anywhere on the internet, do let me know, and I'll be pleased to supply you with the relevant passages where I have analysed all this.

Anyway, I suggest that part of the answer, indeed perhaps a great deal of it, begins with a secret meeting held on 13 November 2007 at the house of Raplh and Sally Eveleigh on Portugal's Algarve coast.

The 'Secret Seven' at that meeting were:

1. Robert Murat
2. Brian Kennedy
3. Murat's lawyer Francisco Pagarete
4. Kennedy's in-house lawyer, Freemason and Director of Madeleine's Fund, Edward Smethurst
5. Murat's Mum
6. Ralph Eveleigh, and
7. Sally Eveleigh.

Two weeks later, the Portuguese press got hold of this meeting being held and publicised it. Kennedy had to come up with a rapid explanation for why he was there and said that he had flown over to Portugal 'to offer Murat a job finding Madeleine'.

I will refrain from commenting on that other than to say I found his explanation 'interesting'.

You see, it was not long after that that there was a gradual retraction of the statements of RO, RO'B and FP implicating Murat as hanging around the Ocean Club.

Not only that, these retractions, as well as happening gradually, also happened in newspaper articles.

A common feature of these newspaper articles was that they were sourced from many people - or were they one and the same? - described as:

'a source close to the family'

'a family friend'

'a close friend of the McCanns'

'a legal source'

'a source close to the McCanns' legal team'

'a well-placed source'

'a spokesman for the McCanns'

(or any one of about two dozen similar descriptions).

Just to give you a clue, the main period for these gradual retractions was late November 2007 to February 2008.

But I'm sure you will find more in my article on Robert Murat.

The TIME of the alleged Smith Sighting & the Till Receipts that don't Tally?