CRIMEWATCH

that's good isn't it. they ask if people can help with identification and when they do theyre told theyre wasting police time. is that what they told Smith family.

Others are cruelly saying its G McC. well if the photo fits.

So mr smith is cruel too......

Okay, I watched this programme with great interest.

My verdict at the end was that Andy Redwood was playing his cards very close to his chest, not ruling anything or anybody in or out.

What is clear now though, is how much the McCanns have hampered and damaged the search for their own daughter by placing too much importance on Jane Tanner's sighting.

We know, as far as the PJ were concerned, there was never much importance placed on Jane Tanner's sighting by them which is why they went around showing egg faces to people. The PJ knew full well there was a creche in operation and that parents would be collecting children and I believe they mentioned this fact themselves and also they always felt that Jane Tanner was dressing up her sighting too much to give it more credence.

So, it now turns out that there was a man who did pick up his daughter from the creche, who was wearing similar pyjamas to Madeleine. Well, most little girl pyjamas are pinky coloured on white backgrounds.

But too much importance was placed on this, not by the PJ, but by the McCanns themselves who were dictating the terms of the investigation and what a great hindrance this has caused.

This programme did not show up the PJ at all and, to be fair, I have never heard Andy Redwood knock the PJ's efforts.

frencheuropean wrote:Daily mail spinning at full speed:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html

And under, an article about internet nutters :

"Others cruelly claimed Mr McCann, who has been ruled out of the Scotland Yard investigation, looked like the e-fit images of the force’s new prime suspect."

Someone tell them that Martin Smith thought the new prime suspect was Gerry McCann!

I noticed how Gerry said the bedroom door seemed open more than usual, so he looked in and saw Madeliene then pulled the door so it was nearly shut, i think he was hinting the abductor was in the apartment so why wait till nearly 10 oclock to run round the streets with her

James wrote:

kitti wrote:Someone rang up and gave Gerry Mccanns name and was told to stop wasting police time and was hung up on.

that is a disgrace. there is a resemblance. watching the interview tonight i noticed how Gerry's nose is so like the ones in the efits.

I must admit i was looking at Gerry smirking and i thought he looked like the efit

James amd Chrissy1 I agree with you both, and the nose and other features in each photo resembles G jimo.

chrissie1 wrote:I noticed how Gerry said the bedroom door seemed open more than usual, so he looked in and saw Madeliene then pulled the door so it was nearly shut, i think he was hinting the abductor was in the apartment so why wait till nearly 10 oclock to run round the streets with her

It does not make clear in the programme how long Gerry's check took either, but no matter, all that matters is that Gerry was the last known person to see Madeleine, by his own admission, and the E fit looks like Gerry.

Personally, I think now the restaurant staff need to think long and hard about what time the alarm was actually raised.

Madeliene the new investigation sky news 8 30 tonight

frencheuropean wrote:Daily mail spinning at full speed:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html

And under, an article about internet nutters :

"Others cruelly claimed Mr McCann, who has been ruled out of the Scotland Yard investigation, looked like the e-fit images of the force’s new prime suspect."

Others? The Smiths who created the e-fit said it daily mail! how about his button trousers also matching!!
 

It was amusing that the mentioned the mock up of the Mccann's as the moors murderers. They said the Mccann's family had seen it! It was a very clever banksy-esque spoof.

The preplanned abduction and/or interrupted burglary make no sense. Surely a preplanned abduction would focus on one of the younger children not an almost four year old. Anyone staging a burglary does not take an almost certainly screaming child.

It was frustrating beyond belief that those dreaded words "kidnap" and "abduction" were used so freely while ignoring the cadavar and blood evidence sited by the British dogs.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100241245/madeleine-mccann-the-police-are-hunting-for-a-needle-in-a-haystack-should-we-really-be-drawn-into-this-circus/
 
TELEGRAPH
 
Blogs Home » News » Society » Dan Hodges
 
 Dan Hodges
 
Dan Hodges is a former Labour Party and GMB trade union official, and has managed numerous independent political campaigns. He writes about Labour with tribal loyalty and without reservation. He is on Twitter at @dpjhodges.
   
Madeleine McCann: the police are hunting for a needle in a haystack. Should we really be drawn into this circus?  
 By Dan Hodges Society Last updated: October 14th, 2013
 
 
Images of the "man" police want to question (Photo: PA)
 
The circus continues. This morning the police have issued a new e-fit of a man they say they want to interview in relation to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. It is on the front of every newspaper, website and television bulletin in the country.
 
We are being asked to examine it. To rack our brains and scour our memories. Is there anything about this man we find familiar? Is there anything we can do to help the investigation?
 
Our natural instincts kick in. We stare at it. Then we stare deep into ourselves. What if it was our own child, we say. So we stare once more. At the lifeless, digitally produced eyes of the monster. The man who may have snatched that little girl.
 
And at that point we are no longer observers of the circus, but part of it. And because we have become part of it, the harder we stare, the less we see.
 
Two e-fits have been produced this morning. According to police they are of the same man. But in fact, they are of two men. Their hair is different. Their eyebrows are different. Their noses are different. Their ears are different. Their lips are different. Their cheekbones are different.
 
But we’re all part of the circus now. So we say nothing. 
 
The images of the “man” are being broadcast because, according to police, he represents a crucial lead. But if you listen harder you realise that’s not what the police are saying at all. Yes, a spokesman claimed, it was of “vital importance” the man in the images is identified and interviewed. But he then conceded that he “may or may not be key”. According to Det Ch Insp Andy Redwood “Whilst this man may or may not be the key to unlocking this investigation, tracing and speaking to him is of vital importance to us.”
 
He may be the key. He may not be the key. In the same way you or I may be the key, or may not be the key. But we are definitely part of the circus. So we say nothing. 
 
And why is it “vital” this man be traced? Because he was seen with a child. Has anyone said it was Madeleine? No. Was he seen hanging around other children? Has he any record of child abduction, or demonstrating any inappropriate interest in children?
 
Apparently not. According to the police they need to interview him because “We have witnesses placing him in the resort area around the time of Madeleine's disappearance”. Praia da Luz has a resident population of over 3,000 people. That excludes the additional thousands who visit on holiday. And yet being “in the resort area” is now enough to warrant police investigation. But we are part of the circus. And fortunately, we weren’t in the area at the time. So we say nothing. 
 
Is there anything else that makes this particular individual so important to the investigation? Apparently not. Here’s Det Ch Insp Redwood again: "This is far from our only line of inquiry and there will be e-fits released of other sightings as well, who we are equally keen to trace. These people were seen on the day of Madeleine's disappearance and the days leading up to it."
 
So it seems there is nothing special about this “suspect”. There will be other e-fits. Other appeals. Other questions asked about people who “were in the area”. But we are part of the circus now. So we wait for them. And say nothing. 
 
We certainly don’t question whether the police investigation is indeed making any headway. And why should we? The police spokesman assures us they are making “massive steps forward". Though they have also sought to “try and draw everything back to zero… take everything back to the beginning and then reanalyse and reassess everything, accepting nothing”. The police are moving forward, but they are also heading back to zero.
 
The investigating team also appear to be spreading their net wide. “Our requests for help need to be repeated in many different countries,” says Redwood. You may not have been in Praia da Luz. You may never have been to Portugal. You may not live in the UK. You may, in fact, live anywhere on the planet. But the police need your help. Even though they are making great progress. "We still have a lot of material to investigate and much work to do," Redwood admits.
 
And so before our very eyes we see the police engaged in this game of hunting a needle in the haystack. And yet we say nothing. We have our ringside seats to the circus. And we will not be vacating them.
 
But there are some who don’t have seats to the show. They are the faces that stare out from the website Missing Kids. It currently features 123 children who are currently missing from home. The youngest is three years old. The most recent date of disappearance was Michelle Brewer, reported missing six days ago. The oldest, Mary Flanagan, reported missing on December 31st, 1959.
 
They will have no television appeals. No e-fits. No special police units established after direct intervention from the Prime Minister.
 
Madeleine McCann is gone. But the circus rolls on.

margaret wrote:I thought it was interesting about the two men seen in a street talking in raised voices that went hush when someone saw them, this was after the smith sighting so would have been when the tapas group were searching.

yep... I thought the same.

Did i miss the bit where K&G appealed to the nastyman and say they would give him EVERYTHING they had in exchange for Madeleine?

Well, I have never seen such a non-event and all concerned should hang their heads in shame for the misuse of taxpayers money and Redwood ought to be dismissed immediately .!!!!!!! I hope Parliament questions Cameron's judgement and those Members with morals unite to question the integrity of what is going on.

The McCanns , especially Kate who appeared to be on tranquilisers, had very little to say . How can they keep expecting everyone to keep searching for Madeleine ad infinitum ??

Rant Over.

Panda wrote:Well, I have never seen  such a non-event and all concerned should hang their heads in shame for the misuse of taxpayers money and Redwood ought to be dismissed immediately .!!!!!!!  I hope Parliament questions Cameron's judgement and those Members with morals unite to question the integrity of what is going on.

The McCanns , especially Kate  who appeared to be on tranquilisers,  had very little to say . How can they keep expecting everyone to keep searching for Madeleine ad infinitum ??

Rant Over.

Well said Panda    

I have decided that:

1. I question whether or not what was shown last night was the original planned programme. Perhaps a stupid statement, but it did not, for me, gel with the advertising campaign from the past week.

2. I know less having watched the programme than I did before it started. Redwood talked about going back to zero etc., well he did that, but forgot to put half the story back in.

That said, airing the Smith statement must be a bitter pill for Gerry to swallow. He knows smith knows, he knows we know what Smith said so of all the statements to have to hold up as "the" one, they most certainly did not have it all their own way. Mr Smith is just about the one man in Praia da Luz that night they have tried to ignore for six years.

Who knows what the hell is going on. One thing is for sure though, social media needs to keep going with this and continue to demand answers. I think they may finally be starting to understand there are actually people who know the issues surrounding this tale and they will not go away.

We have Michael wright and the likes trawling the Internet and reporting back to the mccanns and the MET about nasty bloggers who dare speak up for Madeleine by turning it around as an attack on THEM.


As I said before, who the hell do the mccanns think they are....wanting people arrested for saying what they think about them ...after all, who put the mccanns in this position, we didn't.

The press reporting us internet. trolls are at least being able to print things in a crafty way.

I was watching Breakfast TV on the BBC this morning where they had a retired woman Superintendent on. She was choosing her words very carefully. And was saying that this information is not new, but only just being released to the public. (Well, we all know that that's not entirely correct, but we'll let this little bit slide). What struck me was that the "abduction" word was not mentioned even once, neither by this ex-policewoman or the presenters.

Well the crime watch programme didn't endear them to people again did it? Read the comments.


http://uk.news.yahoo.com/madeleine-mccann-key-sighting-ruled-210000792.html

is there anywhere that i can watch a bit of the programme - reason i ask is because a lady at work says kate looks very ill - shes a fence sitter and has jumped off - did kate come across as cold hearted re madeleine ?

You can see all of it if you're brave!
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03dz7yj/Crimewatch_14_10_2013/

Iris wrote:I was watching Breakfast TV on the BBC this morning where they had a retired woman Superintendent on.  She was choosing her words very carefully.  And was saying that this information is not new, but only just being released to the public.  (Well, we all know that that's not entirely correct, but we'll let this little bit slide).  What struck me was that the "abduction" word was not mentioned even once, neither by this ex-policewoman or the presenters.

I saw that bit Iris and wondered why they had her on the show, ????

thankyou nby x