- nobody notices? This is not Necker Island, it's a busy resort in Portugal, with people all over the place
- by the same token why did no-one notice the abductor aside from Jane Tanner ? Remember The Smith family did see someone but going in the opposite direction to the Tanner sighting.
Just before 10:00pm on the night of 03 May 2007, the Smith family from Ireland pass a man carrying a child in his arms. The man averts his eyes from them to signal that he does not wish to speak.
- The Smith family, from Ireland, is in Luz for holidays, staying at their own holiday apartment; four adults and 5 children: the father (retired, 58) his wife, his son (23 yr old) and daughter-in-law and their two children (ie, Mr Smith's grandchildren), his daughter (12), two additional grandchildren, 10 and 4, of another daughter back in Ireland.
- approx 21h55, they are returning from "Kelly's Bar", heading north, all spread out along the street
- they pass a man walking down the middle of the street, carrying a child, with the head against his left shoulder and the arms hanging down alongside the body, in light colored or pink pyjamas, bare feet, pale skin typical of British and blond, shoulder-length hair; the girl is about 3-4 years old, about 1 meter tall.
- The man is not dressed like a tourist; he's wearing cream or beige trousers, classic cut, of linen or cotton. He is white, 30-35 yrs, 1.70-1.80 meters tall, average build, physically fit, short, brown hair, with a face that looks tanned.
- Images of Robert Murat begin to circulate around the world
- Back in Ireland, the Smiths watch the news and learn of Jane's statement and the suspicions falling upon Murat.
- The father contacts the Irish police. He tells his story. The man he saw was NOT Murat. He knows Murat and it was not him.
- The father is almost certain that the girl he saw was Madeleine.
- The Smiths are secretly brought back to Portugal. On Saturday, 26 May, in Portimão, Smith and his two children are interviewed.
- Their testimony is credible, but given the lack of light in the area, they can't identify the man who was carrying the child.
- They described the way he walked and carried her; this image is strongly fixed in their memory.
Four months later, during which time the McCanns never sought to exploit this potentially crucial sighting, the Smith family are watching TV. They see the McCanns return to the UK and observe Gerry leave the plane and walk across the tarmac with Sean in his arms.
The father, Martin Smith, is shocked. He recognises the walking style and the way the child is being held against the shoulder. It is exactly like the man he saw on the streets of Praia da Luz, four months earlier.
From th PJ files -
'Further on this issue, the testimony of MARTIN SMITH was considered, pages 1606 and following, reporting the sighting of an individual carrying a child, in one of the streets that lead to the beach. It was said that the child could be MADELEINE McCANN, although it was never peremptorily stated. Some time later, the witness alleged that, by its stance, the individual who carried the child could be GERALD McCANN, which was concluded when he saw him descending the stairs from an airplane, pages 2871, 3991 and following and 4135 and following. It was established that at the time that was being mentioned, GERALD McCANN was sitting at the table, in the Tapas Restaurant.'
Getting back on subject, in summation, last nights Panorama didn't really contain anything new or that enlightening.
- by the same token why did no-one notice the abductor aside from Jane Tanner ? Remember The Smith family did see someone but going in the opposite direction to the Tanner sighting.
Just before 10:00pm on the night of 03 May 2007, the Smith family from Ireland pass a man carrying a child in his arms. The man averts his eyes from them to signal that he does not wish to speak.
- The Smith family, from Ireland, is in Luz for holidays, staying at their own holiday apartment; four adults and 5 children: the father (retired, 58) his wife, his son (23 yr old) and daughter-in-law and their two children (ie, Mr Smith's grandchildren), his daughter (12), two additional grandchildren, 10 and 4, of another daughter back in Ireland.
- approx 21h55, they are returning from "Kelly's Bar", heading north, all spread out along the street
- they pass a man walking down the middle of the street, carrying a child, with the head against his left shoulder and the arms hanging down alongside the body, in light colored or pink pyjamas, bare feet, pale skin typical of British and blond, shoulder-length hair; the girl is about 3-4 years old, about 1 meter tall.
- The man is not dressed like a tourist; he's wearing cream or beige trousers, classic cut, of linen or cotton. He is white, 30-35 yrs, 1.70-1.80 meters tall, average build, physically fit, short, brown hair, with a face that looks tanned.
- Images of Robert Murat begin to circulate around the world
- Back in Ireland, the Smiths watch the news and learn of Jane's statement and the suspicions falling upon Murat.
- The father contacts the Irish police. He tells his story. The man he saw was NOT Murat. He knows Murat and it was not him.
- The father is almost certain that the girl he saw was Madeleine.
- The Smiths are secretly brought back to Portugal. On Saturday, 26 May, in Portimão, Smith and his two children are interviewed.
- Their testimony is credible, but given the lack of light in the area, they can't identify the man who was carrying the child.
- They described the way he walked and carried her; this image is strongly fixed in their memory.
Four months later, during which time the McCanns never sought to exploit this potentially crucial sighting, the Smith family are watching TV. They see the McCanns return to the UK and observe Gerry leave the plane and walk across the tarmac with Sean in his arms.
The father, Martin Smith, is shocked. He recognises the walking style and the way the child is being held against the shoulder. It is exactly like the man he saw on the streets of Praia da Luz, four months earlier.
From th PJ files -
'Further on this issue, the testimony of MARTIN SMITH was considered, pages 1606 and following, reporting the sighting of an individual carrying a child, in one of the streets that lead to the beach. It was said that the child could be MADELEINE McCANN, although it was never peremptorily stated. Some time later, the witness alleged that, by its stance, the individual who carried the child could be GERALD McCANN, which was concluded when he saw him descending the stairs from an airplane, pages 2871, 3991 and following and 4135 and following. It was established that at the time that was being mentioned, GERALD McCANN was sitting at the table, in the Tapas Restaurant.'
Getting back on subject, in summation, last nights Panorama didn't really contain anything new or that enlightening.
Yes. Three, usually. I think you'll see quite a lot of them on beaches around the world.
Do you mean the timelines provided by the McCanns and their friends? Difficult to check those, as despite their arcane detail they're full of holes and inconsistencies. That's why the Portuguese police were so keen to arrange a reconstruction, which for whatever reason the McCanns and their friends refused to attend.
I was wondering when "hate" would be wheeled out. It'll be "vile" next.
The kids were picked up from the creche at 5pm I believe, after that the only sighting of Madeleine outside of the family was by David Payne. David Payne less we forget was mentioned in the Gaspars evidence.
The exact time, nature & length of Paynes visit differs considerably when you read his statement & compare it to Kate & Gerrys. Another one of the many reasons people question what happened that night.
- by the same token why did no-one notice the abductor aside from Jane Tanner ? Remember The Smith family did see someone but going in the opposite direction to the Tanner sighting.
Just before 10:00pm on the night of 03 May 2007, the Smith family from Ireland pass a man carrying a child in his arms. The man averts his eyes from them to signal that he does not wish to speak.
- The Smith family, from Ireland, is in Luz for holidays, staying at their own holiday apartment; four adults and 5 children: the father (retired, 58) his wife, his son (23 yr old) and daughter-in-law and their two children (ie, Mr Smith's grandchildren), his daughter (12), two additional grandchildren, 10 and 4, of another daughter back in Ireland.
- approx 21h55, they are returning from "Kelly's Bar", heading north, all spread out along the street
- they pass a man walking down the middle of the street, carrying a child, with the head against his left shoulder and the arms hanging down alongside the body, in light colored or pink pyjamas, bare feet, pale skin typical of British and blond, shoulder-length hair; the girl is about 3-4 years old, about 1 meter tall.
- The man is not dressed like a tourist; he's wearing cream or beige trousers, classic cut, of linen or cotton. He is white, 30-35 yrs, 1.70-1.80 meters tall, average build, physically fit, short, brown hair, with a face that looks tanned.
- Images of Robert Murat begin to circulate around the world
- Back in Ireland, the Smiths watch the news and learn of Jane's statement and the suspicions falling upon Murat.
- The father contacts the Irish police. He tells his story. The man he saw was NOT Murat. He knows Murat and it was not him.
- The father is almost certain that the girl he saw was Madeleine.
- The Smiths are secretly brought back to Portugal. On Saturday, 26 May, in Portimão, Smith and his two children are interviewed.
- Their testimony is credible, but given the lack of light in the area, they can't identify the man who was carrying the child.
- They described the way he walked and carried her; this image is strongly fixed in their memory.
Four months later, during which time the McCanns never sought to exploit this potentially crucial sighting, the Smith family are watching TV. They see the McCanns return to the UK and observe Gerry leave the plane and walk across the tarmac with Sean in his arms.
The father, Martin Smith, is shocked. He recognises the walking style and the way the child is being held against the shoulder. It is exactly like the man he saw on the streets of Praia da Luz, four months earlier.
From th PJ files -
'Further on this issue, the testimony of MARTIN SMITH was considered, pages 1606 and following, reporting the sighting of an individual carrying a child, in one of the streets that lead to the beach. It was said that the child could be MADELEINE McCANN, although it was never peremptorily stated. Some time later, the witness alleged that, by its stance, the individual who carried the child could be GERALD McCANN, which was concluded when he saw him descending the stairs from an airplane, pages 2871, 3991 and following and 4135 and following. It was established that at the time that was being mentioned, GERALD McCANN was sitting at the table, in the Tapas Restaurant.'
Getting back on subject, in summation, last nights Panorama didn't really contain anything new or that enlightening.
The Smith sighting is either ignored, or changed to make it appear to support Tanner's sighting - despite the very different descriptions regarding the way the man was carrying the child and where he was heading.
If it's possible that one or both of these sightings really was an abductor, then they should both be fully investigated in their own right, not by ignoring one, or fudging them together.
don't be daft, I am not a police expert. Have you now changed your position to say that the Portugese police were competent? That the crime scene was sealed, that they took all the witness statements, that they sealed the border and alerted the Spanish police?
I think I will bow to defeat now. There is clearly something about the McCanns that attracts negativity. I agree, they're middle-class professionals who made a mistake so they must have done it. Stands to reason, dun it?'
I don't know what happened but what I do know is they didn't make a mistake. They made a presumably collective decision to leave three young children all under the age of 4 on their own in an unlocked strange apartment, in a strange land, so they could go and have a meal with their friends. It's a decision they will have to live with for the rest of their lives, and I think they're having great difficulty in doing that.
The Smith sighting is either ignored, or changed to make it appear to support Tanner's sighting - despite the very different descriptions regarding the way the man was carrying the child and where he was heading.
If it's possible that one or both of these sightings really was an abductor, then they should both be fully investigated in their own right, not by ignoring one, or fudging them together.
Spot on, why were/are the McCanns so uninterested in this sighting, a sighting by a number of reliable witnesses ?
The Smith sighting is either ignored, or changed to make it appear to support Tanner's sighting - despite the very different descriptions regarding the way the man was carrying the child and where he was heading.
If it's possible that one or both of these sightings really was an abductor, then they should both be fully investigated in their own right, not by ignoring one, or fudging them together.
Correct. Both of these sightings should be given equal importance. As far as I'm aware no-one has come forward in order to be eliminated from the enquiry.
On the night Madeleine went missing a man was seen carrying a small child on two separate occasions. Jane Tanner saw such a man and so did the Smith family.
I can't help wondering if the Smith sighting gets ignored because Mr Smith has said that the man in question looked like Gerry McCann.
Everything the Portugese police say is dodgy. And they have a motive - covering up their own incompetence. Yeah, perhaps all the time the McCanns were driving around the resort with their daughter's body in the boot of the car (presumably in the dry ice that they just happened to have handy_
...I find this special treatment of the McCanns and the disregard for other families in their (alleged) position to be disturbing.
Every so often a victim really catches the public imagination. Obv this is true for Maddie.
As for the parents... maybe he's a Freemason or somesuch? Just saying...
As a mum I cannot understand leaving children of that age alone. I did it with my son in a hotel with a listening service and I was downstairs. But would never have considered going to a different building FFS.
So the McGanns and their friends were in a tapas bar. It really wouldn't have been too difficult for all of them to take turns sitting with the children for 30 mins. It wouldn't have been that disruptive to a tapas style meal.... Just saying... But it probably would have taken someone sober to make that decision... Just saying...
I think the most likely scenario is that Maddie had an accident in/near the room and the parents have covered it up. Shame on them. But they will have to live with that guilt...until such time as the 'truth will out' or they begin to believe their own fabrication...
But on the other hand...
Some have said that their behaviour immediately after Maddie's disappearance was strange. Anyone remember the Dingo baby case... The mum was villified because she wasn't reacting how other ppl expected her to, and forensic opportunities were missed. It took ? over 20 years for the truth to come to light...and unfortunately their story has been proved to be true.
Sometimes, strange and rare things do happen. But of course, it can be a devil to try and prove it...
I don't think the dingo baby case has been proven to be true. Though the parents were cleared, I believe their story wasn't fully accepted by the courts and this is why they went to court recently to try to make the court accept that dingoes kill humans. Perhaps, the courts have accepted this and it's not been widely reported?
I don't think many people suspect the couple killed their daughter. However, the accidental death and cover up theory seems to be the one people believe including the original investigators.
That's nasty. I did send money for their campaign. I am genuinely sorry you and others think they did away with their own daughter.
Why do you keep on about murder? As far as I can see most sensible posters are asking questions that they want answered and when that happens they will make their own minds up as to what happened or the law will intevene. I note you don't answer many questions yourself.
Why do you keep on about murder? As far as I can see most sensible posters are asking questions that they want answered and when that happens they will make their own minds up as to what happened or the law will intevene. I note you don't answer many questions yourself.
I suspect it's because they know that the suggestion of murder can be seen as a slight on the character of the couple whereas there's ground to suspect the accidental death and concealment theory.
There's an interesting article below with regards to sniffer dogs. Also, didn't the Portuguese police also mess up with regards to a car in which it was shown that it wasn't hired until after the child's disappearance?
No, they didn't. They were fully aware of when the car was hired.
I suspect it's because they know that the suggestion of murder can be seen as a slight on the character of the couple whereas there's ground to suspect the accidental death and concealment theory.
I agree, but I asumed the poster wasn't a part of team McCann.
The whole story has been full of ' true' stories that were then lies, family interviews that then disappeared etc. So much confusion was created, many lost sight of the basics. Remember Gerry saving some guys life on the plane? And his stolen wallet with his last picture of Maddie in it?
I don't think the dingo baby case has been proven to be true. Though the parents were cleared, I believe their story wasn't fully accepted by the courts and this is why they went to court recently to try to make the court accept that dingoes kill humans. Perhaps, the courts have accepted this and it's not been widely reported?
excellent comparison. Another woman whom the media and the population took a dislike to and therefore she MUST be guilty.
Close-knit happy family, hard-working with few worries have daughter abducted.
Police can't find abductor
Parents deemed to be at fault because they don't fit a stereo type and are middle-class
Innuendo and gossip take over despite no evidence and no motive
Ludicrous theories given credibility
Couple must now not only find their missing daughter but must prove their 'innocence.'
WELCOME TO HAPPY COMPASSIONATE BRITAIN
Close-knit happy family, hard-working with few worries have daughter abducted.
Police can't find abductor
Parents deemed to be at fault because they don't fit a stereo type and are middle-class
Innuendo and gossip take over despite no evidence and no motive
Ludicrous theories given credibility
Couple must now not only find their missing daughter but must prove their 'innocence.'
WELCOME TO HAPPY COMPASSIONATE BRITAIN
Maybe I'm mistaken but wasn't their first thought that Maddie had been abducted. Why? If my daughter were missing from her bed either at home or on a holiday complex even if we were sitting in the next room, my first thought would be she had woken up and wandered off. I could never understand why they were eating at the tapas bar instead of barbequing in the garden given they didn’t want to use the facilities of the baby sitting services, which I believe were available. Why did they take the children on holiday with them if they wanted an adult holiday not only together but with friends.
Either the child is dead or, if she was abducted living another life under another name and will never query her status. What really happened on the night will remain as it always has been shrouded in mystery. Parents have ultimate responsiblity for their children and these two failed their daughter.
Comments
- by the same token why did no-one notice the abductor aside from Jane Tanner ? Remember The Smith family did see someone but going in the opposite direction to the Tanner sighting.
Just before 10:00pm on the night of 03 May 2007, the Smith family from Ireland pass a man carrying a child in his arms. The man averts his eyes from them to signal that he does not wish to speak.
- The Smith family, from Ireland, is in Luz for holidays, staying at their own holiday apartment; four adults and 5 children: the father (retired, 58) his wife, his son (23 yr old) and daughter-in-law and their two children (ie, Mr Smith's grandchildren), his daughter (12), two additional grandchildren, 10 and 4, of another daughter back in Ireland.
- approx 21h55, they are returning from "Kelly's Bar", heading north, all spread out along the street
- they pass a man walking down the middle of the street, carrying a child, with the head against his left shoulder and the arms hanging down alongside the body, in light colored or pink pyjamas, bare feet, pale skin typical of British and blond, shoulder-length hair; the girl is about 3-4 years old, about 1 meter tall.
- The man is not dressed like a tourist; he's wearing cream or beige trousers, classic cut, of linen or cotton. He is white, 30-35 yrs, 1.70-1.80 meters tall, average build, physically fit, short, brown hair, with a face that looks tanned.
- Images of Robert Murat begin to circulate around the world
- Back in Ireland, the Smiths watch the news and learn of Jane's statement and the suspicions falling upon Murat.
- The father contacts the Irish police. He tells his story. The man he saw was NOT Murat. He knows Murat and it was not him.
- The father is almost certain that the girl he saw was Madeleine.
- The Smiths are secretly brought back to Portugal. On Saturday, 26 May, in Portimão, Smith and his two children are interviewed.
- Their testimony is credible, but given the lack of light in the area, they can't identify the man who was carrying the child.
- They described the way he walked and carried her; this image is strongly fixed in their memory.
Four months later, during which time the McCanns never sought to exploit this potentially crucial sighting, the Smith family are watching TV. They see the McCanns return to the UK and observe Gerry leave the plane and walk across the tarmac with Sean in his arms.
The father, Martin Smith, is shocked. He recognises the walking style and the way the child is being held against the shoulder. It is exactly like the man he saw on the streets of Praia da Luz, four months earlier.
From th PJ files -
'Further on this issue, the testimony of MARTIN SMITH was considered, pages 1606 and following, reporting the sighting of an individual carrying a child, in one of the streets that lead to the beach. It was said that the child could be MADELEINE McCANN, although it was never peremptorily stated. Some time later, the witness alleged that, by its stance, the individual who carried the child could be GERALD McCANN, which was concluded when he saw him descending the stairs from an airplane, pages 2871, 3991 and following and 4135 and following. It was established that at the time that was being mentioned, GERALD McCANN was sitting at the table, in the Tapas Restaurant.'
Getting back on subject, in summation, last nights Panorama didn't really contain anything new or that enlightening.
Wow! Thanks. I will read through.
I'll look out for the spades.:D
The exact time, nature & length of Paynes visit differs considerably when you read his statement & compare it to Kate & Gerrys. Another one of the many reasons people question what happened that night.
That's nasty. I did send money for their campaign. I am genuinely sorry you and others think they did away with their own daughter.
The Smith sighting is either ignored, or changed to make it appear to support Tanner's sighting - despite the very different descriptions regarding the way the man was carrying the child and where he was heading.
If it's possible that one or both of these sightings really was an abductor, then they should both be fully investigated in their own right, not by ignoring one, or fudging them together.
I don't know what happened but what I do know is they didn't make a mistake. They made a presumably collective decision to leave three young children all under the age of 4 on their own in an unlocked strange apartment, in a strange land, so they could go and have a meal with their friends. It's a decision they will have to live with for the rest of their lives, and I think they're having great difficulty in doing that.
Spot on, why were/are the McCanns so uninterested in this sighting, a sighting by a number of reliable witnesses ?
I feel genuinely sorry for you that your paranoia has reached such heights that you accuse me of suggesting they killed their daughter.:mad:
Take a chill pill girl.:(
Correct. Both of these sightings should be given equal importance. As far as I'm aware no-one has come forward in order to be eliminated from the enquiry.
On the night Madeleine went missing a man was seen carrying a small child on two separate occasions. Jane Tanner saw such a man and so did the Smith family.
I can't help wondering if the Smith sighting gets ignored because Mr Smith has said that the man in question looked like Gerry McCann.
Please verify this allegation with facts, thanks.
Every so often a victim really catches the public imagination. Obv this is true for Maddie.
As for the parents... maybe he's a Freemason or somesuch? Just saying...
As a mum I cannot understand leaving children of that age alone. I did it with my son in a hotel with a listening service and I was downstairs. But would never have considered going to a different building FFS.
So the McGanns and their friends were in a tapas bar. It really wouldn't have been too difficult for all of them to take turns sitting with the children for 30 mins. It wouldn't have been that disruptive to a tapas style meal.... Just saying... But it probably would have taken someone sober to make that decision... Just saying...
I think the most likely scenario is that Maddie had an accident in/near the room and the parents have covered it up. Shame on them. But they will have to live with that guilt...until such time as the 'truth will out' or they begin to believe their own fabrication...
But on the other hand...
Some have said that their behaviour immediately after Maddie's disappearance was strange. Anyone remember the Dingo baby case... The mum was villified because she wasn't reacting how other ppl expected her to, and forensic opportunities were missed. It took ? over 20 years for the truth to come to light...and unfortunately their story has been proved to be true.
Sometimes, strange and rare things do happen. But of course, it can be a devil to try and prove it...
I find it hard to believe they killed Madeleine but I do think they lied and covered up their movements on the night to protect their asses.
Why do you keep on about murder? As far as I can see most sensible posters are asking questions that they want answered and when that happens they will make their own minds up as to what happened or the law will intevene. I note you don't answer many questions yourself.
I suspect it's because they know that the suggestion of murder can be seen as a slight on the character of the couple whereas there's ground to suspect the accidental death and concealment theory.
No, they didn't. They were fully aware of when the car was hired.
I agree, but I asumed the poster wasn't a part of team McCann.
The whole story has been full of ' true' stories that were then lies, family interviews that then disappeared etc. So much confusion was created, many lost sight of the basics. Remember Gerry saving some guys life on the plane? And his stolen wallet with his last picture of Maddie in it?
excellent comparison. Another woman whom the media and the population took a dislike to and therefore she MUST be guilty.
Police can't find abductor
Parents deemed to be at fault because they don't fit a stereo type and are middle-class
Innuendo and gossip take over despite no evidence and no motive
Ludicrous theories given credibility
Couple must now not only find their missing daughter but must prove their 'innocence.'
WELCOME TO HAPPY COMPASSIONATE BRITAIN
What evidence have you for abduction? Maybe there wasn't one? Parents deemed to be at fault as they did nothing to help investigation,instead hired PR people and left teh country ASAP. You not been reading this thread? As ludicrous as a mysterious abductor strick unseen ,despite regualr checks to apartment?
No-one has suggested this.
Maybe I'm mistaken but wasn't their first thought that Maddie had been abducted. Why? If my daughter were missing from her bed either at home or on a holiday complex even if we were sitting in the next room, my first thought would be she had woken up and wandered off. I could never understand why they were eating at the tapas bar instead of barbequing in the garden given they didn’t want to use the facilities of the baby sitting services, which I believe were available. Why did they take the children on holiday with them if they wanted an adult holiday not only together but with friends.
Either the child is dead or, if she was abducted living another life under another name and will never query her status. What really happened on the night will remain as it always has been shrouded in mystery. Parents have ultimate responsiblity for their children and these two failed their daughter.