Not buying it !.McCann developments.Wendy Murphy

[izabsmiling]

Investigators are hoping that new information will help solve the mystery of what happened to Madeleine McCann.

The then- three-year-old British girl disappeared six years ago while vacationing with her family in Portugal.

Scotland Yard is planning to release a computerized sketch of a possible person of interest in the case.

Former prosecutor Wendy Murphy joined America’s News Headquarters to discuss the development.

"I’m not buying it. I think this is more PR than anything," Murphy said. "I think this is all related to a civil suit now underway in Portugal." 

The McCanns sued the former police chief for defamation because he wrote a tell-all book.

Alisyn pointed out that the McCanns claim the Portuguese police never took the case seriously

read full transcript http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2013/10/former-us-prosecutor-wendy-murphy-think.html

taken from http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/10/10/new-image-suspect-be-released-madeleine-mccann-case

(footage)

Wendy Murphy (former child abuse and sex crimes prosecutor, now adjunct professor and trial and appellate attorney specializing in crime victims) 

[izabsmiling]

and the latest.I feel sorry for the Smith family.

______________________________________________________________________________________________

Detectives believe a sighting of a man carrying a blonde girl 500 yards from the McCanns’ holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal, is of ‘vital importance’.

But the account of Irish holidaymakers who saw the suspect has been called into question because they originally said they were ‘60 to 80 per cent sure’ it was Madeleine’s father Gerry.

 

Police have however said they are certain Mr McCann is not involved.

Martin and Mary Smith gave police a signed statement when they returned home to Drogheda, County Louth.  

 

They said they had seen a man carrying a child toward Praia da Luz’s beach at 10pm on the night Madeleine disappeared – May 3, 2007.

Metodo 3, a detective agency hired by the McCanns, produced two e-fits of the man in 2008 based on the Smiths’ account. 

 

Crimewatch's Madeline McCann special was the most watched edition of the BBC show in its 29 year history, attracting more than seven million viewers.

The hour long programme, which saw Scotland Yard reveal new findings, peaked with 7.3 million, 30 per cent of the total audience share in the five minutes from 9.25pm.

The show had an average of 6.7 million viewers, 27.4 per cent of the share, adding almost three million viewers to the channel's slot average of 3.9 million, nearly half the audience share enjoyed on Monday.

A BBC spokeswoman said: 'It is the highest audience for a Crimewatch programme on record, going back to 2002.' 

The BBC does not have audience figures for Crimewatch, pre-dating that. It was first broadcast in 1984.

Monday night's Crimewatch was up against the popular ITV series Doc Marten which drew an average audience of seven million. The previous series high on March 31st, 2008, recorded 5.5 million (24 per cent). The ten minute update at 10:35pm also attracted 3.3 million (22.5 per cent).

BBC head of communications Sam Hodges, responding to a criticism on Twitter it was a 'ghastly ratings chaser', suggested the big audience was 'a reflection of the public interest'.

The images were made public this week when Scotland Yard revealed the mystery man is now the prime suspect.

The detective leading the Metropolitan Police investigation is expected to travel to Ireland in the coming weeks.

Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood said he was extremely pleased with the response to Monday night’s Crimewatch appeal.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2462105/Madeleine-McCanns-parents-delight-Crimewatch-respons... 

[azureline**]

Why do you feel sorry for the Smith Family?

[cherry*135]

But the account of Irish holidaymakers who saw the suspect has been called into question because they originally said they were ‘60 to 80 per cent sure’ it was Madeleine’s father Gerry.

That is a very strange statement. THEY did not give exact same statements so THEY did not all say - 60 to 80% sure it was Gerry;

The Smith's gave individual statements even though they all saw the man carrying a girl.Ttheir statements were all worded differently (as I posted earlier, the Fathers statement and his adult daughters from police records)some said they would not recognise the man again, the light was poor, the assumed age of the man differed by quite a lot between father and daughters statement etc.

[cherry*135]

Gerry McCann was never arrested on the strength (or lack of it) on this witness statement.

Official Inquiry Files and Documents

Martin Smith and family Statements

This information belongs to the Ministério Público in Portimão, Portugal.

Email sent from Joao Carlos Silva Pereira to Bernard Gattney

8th November 2007
Subject: Martin Smith

Following the enclosed report you are now kindly requested to ask him the following questions:

- Does he confirm the statement he made in Portugal on May 26th 2007?

- Can he describe in detail the individual he saw carrying a child on May 3rd 2007, notwithstanding the fact that he has already made this description in his previous statements? Was this individual alone?

- When and in what mass medium has he seen the news of Gerald McCann going down the plane stairs, and carrying one of his children? (If possible he should be shown the above-mentioned pictures, as well as asked whether he confirms or disconfirms this man was the same individual he saw on May 3rd 2007).

- Was it really Gerry McCann? Is he sure of this fact?

- Does he recognise Gerald McCann from the facial features or from the way he was carrying the child?

- Are his family members, namely the ones who were with him on May 3rd 2007, able to recognise the individual? If yes, do they also identify the individual as being Gerald McCann? (If yes, such family members should also be interviewed with a view to equally answering the above questions).

- Any other possible significant question, whether arising from the answers of Martin Smith to the above questions or that is deemed as relevant, should be equally asked.

30/01/2008

Additional statement from Martin Smith ( his wife did not want to make another statement)

I  hereby declare that this statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence I will be liable to prosecution if i state in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.


I would like to state that the statement I made on 26th May 2007 in Portugal is correct.

The description of the individual that I saw on 3rd May 2007 carrying a child is as follows. He was average build, 5 foot 10' in height, brown hair cut short, aged 40 years approximately. Wearing beige trousers and darkish top maybe a jacket or blazer. He had a full head of hair with a tight cut. This individual was alone.

I saw Gerard McCann (sic) going down the plane stairs carrying one of his children on 9th September 2007 BBC news at 10 PM, I have been shown the video clip by Sergeant Hogan which I recognise. A clip I have seen before on the Internet. In relation to the video clips of Gerard McCann and the person I saw on 3rd May 2007 when I saw the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007 something struck me that it could have been the same person. It was the way Gerard McCann turned his head down which was similar to what the individual did on 3rd May 2007 when we met him. It may have been the way he was carrying the child either. I would be 60-80% sure that it was Gerard McCann that I met that night carrying a child. I am basing that on his mannerism in the way he carried the child off the plane.

After seeing the BBC news at 10 PM, footage on the 9th September 2007 I contacted Leicestershire police with this information. During that time I spoke to all my family members who were with me on the night of 3rd May 2007 about this and the only one who felt the same way as me was my wife. She had seen the video clip of Gerard McCann walking down the stairs of the plane earlier that day. We did not discuss this until some days later. This statement has been read over to me and is correct.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

[cherry*135]

There were 11 children in the evening creche near the McCanns accommodation.

[***super_nova***]

---

@izabsmiling wrote:

---

Grime testified that a series of barks indicated the dog detected human decomposition in Bianca's bedroom, on her blanket, car seat, as well as in her bedroom and Lane's vehicle.

On cross-examination, Grime said the dog did not detect the odor of human decomposition on Lane's clothing. Not long after Lane reported Bianca was taken by carjackers, police found his car nearby with the engine running. Bianca has never been found.

Police and prosecutors believe Lane killed Bianca, hid her body and concocted a carjacking story to cover it up. 

http://eddieandkeela.blogspot.com.au/2012/10/prosecutors-say-dogs-detection-of-human.html

---

Interesting that the dog did not react to the car seat while it was covered in brown paper, but reacted to it when unwrapped.  The reason why these dogs can detect remains is that they can smell them even deep under ground, and this dog missed it just because it was covered by brown paper?  Just because this man was guilty/ might be guilty does not mean that the dog was right.  Weird that the dog did not indicate the man was in contact with the child's body.

You are reading pages that are trying to say that dogs are 100% reliable.  They are not.  They will indicate a find if there are hundreds years old animal bones deep under the ground.  It is up to the humans to sort out what is relevant and what is not. 

 And while there are claims that these dogs can pick up scent of freshly dead body, they do not indicate the stage; the dog handler does not know if the "find" is somebody dead for few minutes or a bone of archaeological value.

[cherry*135]

If they wanted to find her they shoud be asking for the case to be reopened in Portugal.

You expect the Portugeuse to spend $m's for an investigation into a British child? Why do you think they closed the investigation after a shortish time period of 12 months?

.I don't suggested murder though I do tend to feel that she died in that room

Pure speculation, just as well people aren't put in jail going on what a person gathering information from blog opinions 'feels'.

.It seems that they have put a bit of effort into discredit the PJ and  their police investigation.That being the case ...people don't look at what was done and found where they otherwise might.

One main police investigator was dropped from the investigation sacked and charged with perjury (relating to another missing child investigation)

The chief investigator resigned.

The  sniffer dogs

If so why is the evidence of cadaver dogs being used in Court rooms ?

Because other scientific evidence, or human bones,skull etc are found to back up the dogs evidence.

In Maddie's case there was nothing to suggest the dogs were right. Dogs don't talk, no-one can ask them what about this or that?

No-one - human or dog is infallible.

I can't see anything that points to the McCanns doing of the thigs they are accused of in this thread, which arise from theories posted on anti-McCann blogs.

The fired Portuguese policeman's theory was Madeleine died from a serious accident near the sofa... no details of how this serious accident occured or what the accident was.

[izabsmiling]

Az, earlier on in the thread there is an open letter to the BBC Crimewatch .

It gives a bit of info on that investigation company (based in Barcalona)...who have more recently (mid this year) had some International attention  of the kind I'd rather not discuss.

Why they sought out and visited a key witness who had written an official police statement indicating that he believed that one of the clients they were working for could be the person he saw at around 10pm on the 3rd May 2007... clients who seemingly  believed that the Jane Tanner sighting (later to be thought to be Murat ..he has sued) ..I don't know ...

Did the clients know that Jane's sighting at 9.15 wasn't this  'abductor' ? and sought to get those efits in 2008 for that reason ?

Why did they get an efit in 2008 and not release it til now (after Jane Tanner sighting ruled out by this unknown/unnamed citizen coming forward ) ?

Does the different appearances in the 2 pics of Mr anyone give a lot of room for him to be anyone ?

Do you think these 'private investigators ' were nice to Mr Smith and family  ?

[izabsmiling]

Am3, those dogs aren't bias either .Portugal needed 'more evidence' to reopen..

[cherry*135]

Mr Smiths statement (especially the second one) says he bases his assumption that the man carrying the girl was Gerry.. on the way he (Gerry) was holding her... as it was similar to the way he carried one of the twins when he (Gerry) was seen on a TV clip when getting of a plane back in the UK (a few months after Madeliene disappeared?).

Do you really think that is enough information to arrest someone?

Mr Smiths original statement said he would not be able to recognise that man again in person or in a photograph.

He was not 100% sure it was Gerry.

Mrs Smith did not want to give a further statement... was she not convinced at all it was Gerry they saw?