Why I Believe Smithman is Real and Likely to be Gerry - Pat Brown

[quote="Panda"
When Pat Brown first mooted her theory I thought she could not have investigated the timelines . I did ask earlier if there was a Map available to show how far away 5a was from the road the Smiths walked down after they left the Pub, I'm sure some clever Member will find it..[/quote]



Pat Briwn walked the route from 5a to Smith sighting during her site visit. It took 8 minutes as far as I recall.

mossman wrote:[quote="Panda"
When Pat Brown first mooted her theory I thought she could not have investigated the timelines . I did ask earlier if there was a Map available to show how far away 5a was from the road the Smiths walked down after they left the Pub, I'm sure some clever Member will find it..

Pat Briwn walked the route from 5a to Smith sighting during her site visit.  It took 8 minutes as far as I recall.[/quote]

Thanks Mossman , a lot shorter than I thought . If Gerry did leave the apartment with the body of Madeleine , where was he heading and why is the area further away from 5a being investigated then. The Smiths had just left a Pub and were on their way home ,we would need a drawing or map to determine where Smith's suspect was headed . Could he have been picking up his daughter from the crèche? or taking her home from a visit to a relative.?

It is on record that Smith went to the Police Station when he knew of Madeleine's disappearance and the Police took his statement...........why did they wait several months to ask the Irish Police to interview him again and that only because he saw Gerry leaving a Plane. The Smiths had a couple more days in PDL, the Police could have, like they did with Jane Tanner, taken Mr. Smith in a car to somewhere they knew Gerry would be and asked if he was the man he saw.

Panda said, "The Smiths had a couple more days in PDL, the Police could have, like they did with Jane Tanner, taken Mr. Smith in a car to somewhere they knew Gerry would be and asked if he was the man he saw."

Because the parents weren't 'persons of interest' at that point, Panda.

wjk wrote:Panda said, "The Smiths had a couple more days in PDL, the Police could have, like they did with Jane Tanner, taken Mr. Smith in a car to somewhere they knew Gerry would be and asked if he was the man he saw."

Because the parents weren't 'persons of interest' at that point, Panda.

Yes, probably not, but when they did become persons of interest it was not the Portugese Police who acted first , it was Smith who saw Gerry descending from the Plane and contacted the Police again. I still don't think it was Gerry Smith saw. Mossman said Pat Brown walked the distance in 8
minutes, how much longer would it have taken for Gerry after passing the Smiths to dispose of the body and be back in time to the Ocean Club before the Police???

Iv'e just had another look and these are the timelines for Mrs Fenn and Mr Smith.

Mr Smith says he left the Restaurant around 21.55 hrs and passed the Man about 22.00 hrs

Mrs Smith says she speaks to Gerry at 10.30pm(22.30pm)


The Alarm was raised by Kate at 10.00 pm give or take a couple of minutes , she rushes back to the Restaurant and all except Fiona's Mother is left at the table after they all rush back to 5a.

How could Gerry have been passing the Smith's about 10pm when they didn't even know Madeleine was missing. ???? See what I mean?

The Smiths dined at a restaurant then went on to a bar for a drink on the way home. All give a time of around or about 10 pm for passing the man.

Mrs Fenn in her statement says it was 10.30 pm when she first heard a woman hysterical, saying we have let her down and she went to her balcony and spoke to Gerry.

Other than the Tapas group, who can state with certainty that Gerry was there at 10 ?

mossman wrote:The Smiths dined at a restaurant then went on to a bar for a drink on the way home.  All give a time of around or about 10 pm for passing the man.

Mrs Fenn in her statement says it was 10.30 pm when she first heard a woman hysterical, saying we have let her down and she went to her balcony and spoke to Gerry.

Other than the Tapas group, who can state with certainty that Gerry was there at 10 ?

Nobody, and this has been done to death on this forum and others. Even Sr Amaral has stated this.

mossman wrote:The Smiths dined at a restaurant then went on to a bar for a drink on the way home.  All give a time of around or about 10 pm for passing the man.

Mrs Fenn in her statement says it was 10.30 pm when she first heard a woman hysterical, saying we have let her down and she went to her balcony and spoke to Gerry.

Other than the Tapas group, who can state with certainty that Gerry was there at 10 ?

Morning Mossman, who can say with any certainty exactly what happened on that fateful night???You probably think I am being pedantic, but I rule the Smiths out ,  

As for changing tack, it is obvious that SY have incurred more expense and the wrath of PDL Residents , now they want a completely different area searched ....this is farcical now.

courtesy of mccannfiles




Gonçalo Amaral speaks to IOL PortugalDiário, 03/04 August 2008



PortugalDiário: The PJ's report dismisses the Smiths' testimony, due to the hour at which they say they saw the person with the child…

Gonçalo Amaral: 'It cannot be that way, because nobody knows for sure at what time the things happened. The reconstruction was not made, therefore it is impossible to know for certain. The employees do not state that Gerry McCann was in the restaurant. They only say that people were sitting down and getting up from the table. Their testimony [Smith] is very credible. The way that the person walked, the clumsy manner in which the child was held. It is nothing that sounds invented. Is it evidence? Certainly not. It is information that has to be worked further.'

Cough cough.....  Had the Statements made by the Smiths tallied with the McCann Statements regarding the time lines the Portugese Police would surely have hauled Gerry in for questioning. According to the Map 8 minutes would seem too short if you were carrying a child on your arm , could the father have been collecting his child from the crèche?

Can one of you clever Members do me a favour and post the map showing where the Smith's passed the Guy carrying a child I wanted to know where he came from and where he was headed. It's on the same post as Amaral's comment in the mccannfiles.

Panda wrote:Can one of you clever Members do me a favour and post the map showing where the Smith's passed the Guy carrying a child I wanted to know where he came from and where he was headed. It's on the same post as Amaral's comment in the mccannfiles.

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=gerry+mccann+seen+by+the+smiths+map&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=SIeYU_3gFOPT7AajkoDABg&ved=0CCwQsAQ&biw=1600&bih=775#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=VKOKRb_98EKQWM%253A%3BuJEeBZlzN-UJAM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.mccannfiles.com%252Fsitebuildercontent%252Fsitebuilderpictures%252Fsmith.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.mccannfiles.com%252Fid162.html%3B500%3B814



also.....

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html

wjk wrote:

Thanks wjk pity the map only shows the one street instead of the route from 5a to the street ...can't have everything though can we.  My guess is it is a Father who had collected his child from the crèche , or a relative's home.

Panda wrote:Thanks wjk pity the map only shows the one street instead of the route from 5a to the street ...can't have everything though can we.  My guess is it is a Father who had collected his child from the crèche , or a relative's home.

 
Then why didn't this man come forward? Surely he would have remembered seeing an entire family of holidaymakers at around 10pm and would have notified police that he was this man?

The effort that the McCanns have gone to in order to push Tannerman as the only credible sighting over Smithman, IMO speaks volumes.

jinvta wrote:

Panda wrote:Thanks wjk pity the map only shows the one street instead of the route from 5a to the street ...can't have everything though can we.  My guess is it is a Father who had collected his child from the crèche , or a relative's home.

 
Then why didn't this man come forward? Surely he would have remembered seeing an entire family of holidaymakers at around 10pm and would have notified police that he was this man?

The effort that the McCanns have gone to in order to push Tannerman as the only credible sighting over Smithman, IMO speaks volumes.

Morning junvta, well Amaral did not think the Smith sighting was credible because of the timelines, maybe the guy carrying the child was a foreigner so would not have known about Smith's statement. Let's face it, is anything straightforward abut this case...if there was we wouldn't be discussing it 7 years down the line.   What we do know is the timelines written by Gerry on the cover of a child's book was designed to make sure the Tapas Group all sang from the same hymn sheet........your child has been abducted and all you can think about is making sure you got the times right before the Police arrived???

The same as tanner man didn't come forward ..there wasn't any father.

When did Amaral say he did not think it credible ?  He said it warranted further investigation, he was in the process of bringing the Smiths back to Portugal to interview them, but got removed from the case.  His successor did not follow it up.

Chapter 8 from his book :  

We finally have credible witness statements about that stranger who, on the night of May 3rd, was walking in the streets of Vila da Luz with a child in his arms.


Chapter 20
We decide to get the Smiths back to the Algarve, for a formal identification of Gerry McCann - by means of televised images, certainly - direct confrontation being impossible - and possibly proceed to a reconstruction of the events of the night of May 3rd. The National Director of the Judiciary police agrees, the process is set in motion, all the details are sorted out; all that remains is to choose the hotel where they will be put up. But the Smiths were never to come back to Portugal. After my departure, the PJ were to change their minds. They asked the Irish police to proceed with interviewing the witness. That decision was to seriously delay the process since the Smiths were not interviewed until several months later. Meanwhile, rumours were to circulate and people not involved with the investigation would be made aware of the existence of this witness; someone allegedly even sought out contact with the family, without its being known to what end.

Morning Mossman, here you go


Gonçalo Amaral speaks to IOL PortugalDiário, 03/04 August 2008



PortugalDiário: The PJ's report dismisses the Smiths' testimony, due to the hour at which they say they saw the person with the child…

Gonçalo Amaral: 'It cannot be that way, because nobody knows for sure at what time the things happened. The reconstruction was not made, therefore it is impossible to know for certain. The employees do not state that Gerry McCann was in the restaurant. They only say that people were sitting down and getting up from the table. Their testimony [Smith] is very credible. The way that the person walked, the clumsy manner in which the child was held. It is nothing that sounds invented. Is it evidence? Certainly not. It is information that has to be worked further.'

wjk wrote:

Mucho Gracias wjk award yourself a medal.  

Come on , let's be honest , that looks more than an 8 minute walk especially for someone carrying an almost 4 yr old child , Amaral didn't accept it did he because of the timelines.

Panda - from the piece you have quoted - Mr Amaral says that the Smith testimony is VERY credible.
What he is saying is that this VERY credible testimony never got the chance to be turned into hard evidence because the reconstruction was never done. That's why he said it was 'information that had to be worked further'.
Luckily, Mr Redwood has also decided that the Smith testimony needs to be worked further. Hence his emphasis on those TM-suppressed e-fits on Crimewatch.

Btw - any reasonably fit bloke could easily do that walk in eight minutes.

Panda wrote:Morning Mossman, here you go


Gonçalo Amaral speaks to IOL PortugalDiário, 03/04 August 2008



PortugalDiário: The PJ's report dismisses the Smiths' testimony, due to the hour at which they say they saw the person with the child…

Gonçalo Amaral: 'It cannot be that way, because nobody knows for sure at what time the things happened. The reconstruction was not made, therefore it is impossible to know for certain. The employees do not state that Gerry McCann was in the restaurant. They only say that people were sitting down and getting up from the table. Their testimony [Smith] is very credible. The way that the person walked, the clumsy manner in which the child was held. It is nothing that sounds invented. Is it evidence? Certainly not. It is information that has to be worked further.'

Panda, this quote states it is credible, it says their testimony is very credible. It is not evidence, but should be further worked on.

The PJ report referred to - is that the final report ? If so, it is still not an indication from Amaral he did not find the Smiths credible.

At the end of the day, whether Gerry or not, they say they saw a man. This man has got to be identified, not least because if they were to prosecute anybody without having identified who that man was, it is a very good get out of jail free card for a defence to play.

almostgothic wrote:Panda - from the piece you have quoted - Mr Amaral says that the Smith testimony is VERY credible.
What he is saying is that this VERY credible testimony never got the chance to be turned into hard evidence because the reconstruction was never done. That's why he said it was 'information that had to be worked further'.
Luckily, Mr Redwood has also decided that the Smith testimony needs to be worked further. Hence his emphasis on those TM-suppressed e-fits on Crimewatch.

Btw - any reasonably fit bloke could easily do that walk in eight minutes.

Morning almostgothic with the timelines by Mrs Fenn and the Mcanns it is virtually impossible to make any sense of it all , and the "bloke" carrying a 4 yr old child would obviously take longer to go from a to b . I still think the couple coming from a lane carrying something caught in the Car's headlights in the early hours of the morning is more credible . Mrs Smith says she spoke to Gerry from her Balcony at 10.15 and he confirmed the police had been called (which they hadn't).so how could he be passing the Smiths around that time?

Smith sighting 10 - 10.10 pm

Mrs Fenn on balcony at 10.30 - heard woman, went out, spoke to Gerry.

Distance from sighting to balcony, as walked by Pat Brown 8 minutes.

mossman wrote:

Panda wrote:Morning Mossman, here you go


Gonçalo Amaral speaks to IOL PortugalDiário, 03/04 August 2008



PortugalDiário: The PJ's report dismisses the Smiths' testimony, due to the hour at which they say they saw the person with the child…

Gonçalo Amaral: 'It cannot be that way, because nobody knows for sure at what time the things happened. The reconstruction was not made, therefore it is impossible to know for certain. The employees do not state that Gerry McCann was in the restaurant. They only say that people were sitting down and getting up from the table. Their testimony [Smith] is very credible. The way that the person walked, the clumsy manner in which the child was held. It is nothing that sounds invented. Is it evidence? Certainly not. It is information that has to be worked further.'

Panda, this quote states it is credible, it says their testimony is very credible.  It is not evidence, but should be further worked on.

The PJ report referred to  -  is that the final report ?  If so, it is still not an indication from Amaral he did not find the Smiths credible.

At the end of the day, whether Gerry or not, they say they saw a man.  This man has got to be identified, not least because if they were to prosecute anybody without having identified who that man was, it is a very good get out of jail free card for a defence to play.

"'It cannot be that way, because nobody knows for sure at what time the things happened"
Exactly Mossman, as I have just replied to almostgothic. Smith and his family should have been taken to Portugal and shown several photos of Gerry and all agree that he was the man they saw, that is why Mrs Smith did not give a statement to the Guarda, because she wasn't sure. It was only Gerry stepping from the Plane carrying his Son that jogged Smith's memory, but that is the way most children would be carried at that age.