Back to the Smiths again..
Why do you continue to ignore that Martin Smith (and supposedly his wife) were 60-80% sure it was Gerry. Why is it that despite the fact that even they themselves are not sure that it was Gerry you have ignored this and claim that it was definitely Gerry?
Why do you also ignore that the other 2 members of the Smith group did not think that it was Gerry.
You realise that Martin Smith's own admission that he could not say 100% that it was Gerry McCann would not make it into court because it is not reliable evidence.
Why is this still being brought up?
<modsnip>[/QUOTE
BBM-probably because it really isn't any different than Tanner's sighting of a man carrying a "bundle", that turned into an abductor carrying Maddie, after the McCanns saying she was snatched-JT had no idea what she saw until then-at that point she suddenly recognized what she saw? Everyone in law enforcement (and even some "regular people") know that eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable. That is simply a fact.
I totally agree with you. It makes no sense anyway this sighting the timing is off.
IF we are to believe Gerry had just checked the kids and was standing outside yards away from his apartment talking to a friend, where was the abductor? Also how did the abductor get out of the apartment without a noise, or Madeleine kicking off......She seemed a feisty child for her age with a bit of spunk...I cant imagine she would not have kicked off. The fact the child is asleep or drugged being carried away would mean the abductor had to sedate and quieten her down.....
It seems Tanner saw a lot in a second of vision....Gerry and Jez, then someone just walking along in the light of dusk ..... perhaps carrying something.
Its a known fact on recall that your brain can simulate what you saw to the facts.
So the fact is.....figure walking along in full view of anyone possibly carrying something, could have longish hair...
Child goes missing. Was told the child was wearing pink pyjamas.
Mysterious person then in the mind becomes abductor walking along with child in arms, wearing pink pyjamas.......
I know it can happen as I have a neurological disorder and my brain often lets me something that isnt there, or hides something that is lol. (true).
Its very easy to fit the facts.
However, from this sighting one has to then look at the logics of it.
How logical would it be that this was the abductor taking the child away....through Praia De Luz in full view of everyone, a few minutes after father had checked the children.
The logical thing for an abductor to do would be to contain the child, and take the child away going the other way to the old road and Lagos.....surely.
No this is sighting is not logical....
I do believe she saw someone/male/female but the rest of the scenario has been filled in by her brain taking over...
IMHO.
ALSO one has to think, if she saw bare feet and dangly legs how did she see PINK pyjamas?
IF you carry a child that way the pyjamas ALWAYS ride upto the knees. Even when I am in bed, my PJ bottoms end up at my knees as I sleep with my knees bent.
I expect anyway tomorrow we will be told it was a burglary gone wrong.
We discussed this scenario 5 years ago, when we found the apartment above had been burgled....but decided it wouldnt work.....for lots of reasons.
fftobed:
