CRIMEWATCH

I found it interesting that Andy said the two men might be entirely innocent, they seem to be more of a ruling out issue. He did not qualify smith man with any such type of statement

mossman wrote:If bundle man was on his way back from the crèche, how could he be over there where Tanner saw him ?  I'm no good at maps so maybe my sense of direction is way off ??

I noticed Deadwood didn't say he passed at the top of the road where Jane allegedly saw bundleman.   Only that he went in the McCann's direction!  What the heck does that vague description mean?

What a complete non event. Like a duff firework on bonfire night. All build up and expectation only to fizzle out.

So after two years and millions all SY have come up with is the Smith sighting and an efit that looks like Gerry. All there and available in 2008. "Oh what a circus oh what a show"

kitti wrote:did it actually say that madeleine was on the tennis  court 4 hours before she disappeared....

No kitti. The last photo was the pool. They gave the impression they did stuff together, one being Madeleine running around collecting balls while Gerry played. They did not say when she did this. He said he played thurs blah blah

so actually the  news all day about  'four hours before madeleine goes missing she is on the tennis court with her family' was all spin.


but SY have tried to insinuate it by not saying it wasnt may 3rd

Sky news just said the e-fits were done 5yrs ago!
Would this have been when Brian Kennedy paid the Smiths a visit?

apparently they were sitting in met3 folders and werent passed on....

saloongirl wrote:I knew I shouldn't have watched this before going to bed, I'm far too angry to sleep now

I went against my better judgment and watched a little bit of it.  I reeeeally wish I hadn't as it was ten times worse than I expected.

enter the pj  bashing now......

I think A.R overplayed it when he spoke about the father taking his child from the creche, with a beatific admiration in his tone and rather vague details about this new bundleman. That didn't sound true .

I'm glad I didn't watch, after noting opinions here and elsewhere.
That's about all I can say right now.
I think I need to cool down, as my language is far from temperate at the moment.

What struck me was the reconstruction of them splashing about in the pool. It was the end of April, the pool must have been bloody freezing after the winter. No way would I have jumped in and I certainly would not let my 3 year old daughter go in. That would be asking for trouble. I don't buy that image at all.

Roasted Arizona wrote:I disagree, I think even the actor running with the child at 10pm looked like Gerry.....I think the fact that they are majoring on this sighting could potentially be massive.

The police will know what the Smiths have said and are looking for collaboration I reckon.

I have just watched the re-run once the "original" was over and I agree, in fact I thought it not only looked like Gerry, I thought it was him at first.

Overall, I was disappointed so much was missing, i.e. the 48 questions, cadavar and blood, blue tennis bag, etc.

I think the McCanns must be the only parents in the world to have had three children, under four, go to sleep within "seconds". But then again I don't believe most parents medicate their children to obtain that result.

Things I noticed

1) Gerry's gone bald at the back
2) They admitted (for I think the first time) about the IVF
3) they included the "Why didn't you come for us last night when we were crying", the only thing they have ever said which casts them in a bad light - What is the purpose of disclosing this?
4) A night creche existed. This makes the Mccann's look even worse (!)
5) The night creche gives the Mccann's a way out without losing face. I bet it was interesting to see their faces when Scotland Yard told them about this person (that they had made up to gauge their reaction!)
6) The shutters were initially closed, yet we know they can't be operated from the outside, but they were half down and the windows open outwards do they not? In which case what would the purpose of anyone opening the shutters be? AND: Is it really that windy in that area of portugal? the apartment looked sheltered and it was a hot evening.
7) Redwood said clearly "this was just ONE interpretation of the events that we were working on" RE: the change of time line.
8) WHO IS THAT MAN WHO THE SMITHS SAY LOOK LIKE GERRY AND WHO WAS WEARING TROUSERS SIMILAR TO THAT WHICH GERRY OWNED?
9) There must be a super-injunction in place RE: The Gaspars and David Payne because there was no reason for the TV show not to name them. Especially as David Payne was integral to the plot.
10) Softly, softly catch the monkeys!

frencheuropean wrote:I think A.R overplayed it when he spoke about the father taking his child from the creche, with a beatific admiration in his tone and rather vague details about this new bundleman. That didn't sound true .

That's the point I was making, his details were so vague!  All AR said regarding his so called 'revelation' was that the man took his pajama clad child from the night creche about the time Jane saw someone, and went in the McCann's direction.  No mention of him actually walking along the top of the road at all.  Very fishy indeed!

I am astounded that all the children had the same pyjamas.

I'm sitting here shaking my head, I don't know what to think or where to start.

wjk wrote:Would the father be walking in the direction JT saw him coming from the crèche?

I wouldn't have thought so, If he used the crèche then he must have been on the MW site. if the Mccanns were on the edge of the complex where was he going..!

kitti wrote:apparently they were sitting in met3 folders and werent passed on....

On Radio 4 news it was said that the E-fits had been sitting in the files of a private detective agency.

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.

margaret wrote:

wjk wrote:Would the father be walking in the direction JT saw him coming from the crèche?

I wouldn't have thought so, If he used the crèche then he must have been on the MW site. if the Mccanns were on the edge of the complex where was he going..!

It doesn't make much sense, does it?

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.

Sounds like people involved in a conspiracy....

"You shall stick to ze story."
NEIN

mossman wrote:I am astounded that all the children had the same pyjamas.  

I'm sitting here shaking my head, I don't know what to think or where to start.

The way I see it is, they spent a significant amount of time sycophantically interviewing the 'long-suffering' Kate and Gerry, omitted David Payne's visit to 5A along with the towel clad Kate and his vision of 'angels all dressed in white,' slickly saved Jane's lying butt, and made "the abduction" time viable. All the nasty bits have been whoosh clucked, history has been rewritten, and the whitewash is in full force.

I just watched the Crimewatch update - and Redwood is choosing his words very, very carefully indeed!

He wants to do the best thing for MADELEINE.

Iris wrote:I just watched the Crimewatch update - and Redwood is choosing his words very, very carefully indeed!

He wants to do the best thing for MADELEINE.  

Yes because he knows people are on to him!

Well, many thanks to you all. I have just got home and was about to watch recording. Think I'll just press "delete" instead and have a good night's sleep!