As I’ve said in an earlier post, there’s one precious source of information that the McCanns have so altruistically and gracefully granted humanity: the Channel’s 4 “The Cutting Edge” documentary.
It’s an all-round important document.
For the McCanns, it’s their opportunity to show the world the result of their work analysing all the documentation on Maddie given to them in mid 2008.
For the world, it’s a palpable register of the McCann versions of events, in their very own words, without any censorship or external vilification.
The McCanns at the time stated that the idea behind the documentary was to enable possible witnesses to, through the images, to come forward after realizing that what they’ve might have seen on that night, or preceding and following days, could and would be of crucial importance in the safe return of their abducted daughter, little Madeleine Beth McCann, known to the world simply as Maddie.
To jolt somebody’s memory one thing is essential and that is the attention paid to detail. The smallest thing, even imperceptible to most, might just trigger in someone what could turn out to be the key to this abduction, and so help bring Maddie safely back home to the arms of her loving parents.
No effort in the replication of detail was then to be spared, and we can only assume it wasn’t. So each and every second of this documentary is to be desiccated and savoured with redoubled attention, for it’s the fruit of the effort of dedicated people and loving parents and friends who ALL possessed not one but all four of the following characteristics:
- lived themselves some of the events,
- had privileged access to police file information,
- it was either their daughter or their friend that had been abducted, and whose life was now at stake and that the documentary could save,
- they were being victims of a worldwide campaign of unjustified vilification worldwide, so here was the opportunity to clarify everything and enable all the investigative efforts to be refocused on recovering the little girl.
Could anyone expect any more precision in the description of events than from these people? Obviously not. Yes, Amaral did have privileged access to the information on police files, but did he live those terrible moments the Tapas did? No. Was Maddie his daughter or acquaintance? No. Was he being vilified worldwide? Well, he was from some bigots in UK who think the world revolves around their own belly, so the answer to this question is a no, with minor, really minor, exceptions.
What matters is that Channel’s 4 “The Cutting Edge” is what the McCann’s had to say DID happen that night. This was the documentary that showed the world “The McCann Truth”.
As far as I can recollect (I do have the thing downloaded but don't have the patience to watch it entirely again, so I just use it go and pick the images I desire) three things were reconstructed. I know I said before there were only two, but have since remembered that there's another:
First, a man watching an apartment and witnesses who described how they saw him looking at it. Supposedly, this was the BIG breakthrough of the documentary. It's been more than a year, and nothing really came out of it. Really, really lame that I’d even forgotten that he existed. If memory serves me right, it was “Pimpleman” in the tabloids, but on the documentary appeared a darkish blonde Russian looking kind of individual. Ridiculous is the word that comes to mind.
Second, the Tanner sighting. Just one tiny figment of the whole highly complex algorithm generated to calculate the comings and goings of all those who were supposed to check on their children. And also on the McCann’s triplets, by the way an egotistical couple who, as far as we’ve been told; only checked on their own.
On this sighting, the documentary was quite detailed.
All those involved that night, explained to the point of tears, as expected, what had happened. Just one personal appointment about a detail mentioned. Considering to be a “discrepancy” which side of the road were two witnesses, in a stretch less than 100 yards, is not exactly the same as not agreeing as to which side the baby stroller was turned to, but it's more like saying that WWII took place mostly in South America instead of Europe, North Africa and the Far East. Not exactly a discrepancy, but rather a blatant contradiction. And who won the argument?
That was a night that Jane Tanner learned the true meaning of two words: friendship and reciprocity. And truth is sometimes really, really bitter. To the point of bringing tears to one’s eyes. What you give is not exactly what you receive back.
The third and last reconstruction, the one I find most interesting and revealing is the Smith's Sighting. And what this post is about.
The first interesting fact about it is that, unlike in the Tanner reconstruction just before, there are no previous explanations whatsoever about the event itself. Yes, we know that none of the present lived it themselves (although I do have a strong suspicion that that is not exactly the case), but one would expect to see that brilliant detective that goes by the grace of Edgar, explain, in loco, exactly where, exactly what and exactly how it had happened. So that when we saw the reconstruction all would sink in, and, who knows, someone might just remember something. After all, NINE people (well, in fact just SEVEN as two were little children) had seen this man carry a little girl, whilst in the Tanner sighting only ONE person did.
Why weren't any of the Smiths invited, you may ask, and I must then remind you that if they didn’t think the Smith’s presence was necessary there, it was because it wasn’t. They did come prepared and with all well studied, remember? And do stop being irritatingly cocky with those silly questions.
So we were told that "possibly", only "possibly", another family had seen the abductor, and the director just rolled the scene.
Let's then see what they've shown us. Here are 9 pictures, taken in sequence of the portrayed event:
#1 – The Smith family, all nicely bunched up together, come up the Rua da Escola Primária. On your left, as per green S on the left, we have a stairs. In this particular picture it's not clear its exact location, but later you will see that it's on the near side of the lamppost shown. Notice in the background (yellow arrow), the small light that illuminates the top of the stairs that leads to Kelly’s Bar.
#2 – The Smith family continues to come up the Rua da Escola Primária, and is now nearer. The location of the stairs on the left is slightly clearer. Notice how they remain together as a compact group. They are almost at the S at this point. Once again do pay attention to the visibility one has of the top of the stairs that leads to Kelly’s Bar. No sign of the possible abductor at this point.
#3 – The possible abductor makes his appearance on scene, coming down the well illuminated Rua da Escola Primária, near or at the Y-crossing with Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz.
#4 – The Smith family, still a compact group and still continuing to come up the Rua da Escola Primária, have now reached a garage door, on the right of the image, signalled with G. We know that the possible abductor is near, but has yet to appear on the screen before the family.
#5 - The possible abductor appears before the Smiths. Notice the relative positions. The family is either in front of garage G or has just passed it, and the possible abductor is well in front of them.
#6 – The possible abductor has now passed the Smith family. He seems to be between the family and the garage G. Various members of the family look in an ostensive manner at the possible abductor, as if the fact that a man passing with a child in his arms is something so noticeable that one has to turn one's head to confirm.
As far as we could see, there was no interaction whatsoever between the Smith family and the possible abductor. By the speed with which he walked by the family, as well as the distance between him and them, there seems that there was no occasion or time to ask a “is she asleep?” or say any other similar phrase.
#7 – The possible abductor now appears alone, after passing the Smith family. We can see that he hasn’t yet reached the garage G, so the crossing with the family definitely occurred well before this landmark.
#8 – The possible abductor continues down the Rua da Escola Primária. In this picture we can see the exact location of the stairs S, on the other side of the street of garage G, slightly left of its door but in exact opposite of a street sign.
#9 – The possible abductor heads down Rua da Escola Primária, never to be seen again. This, according to the McCanns, was the last time Maddie was to be seen alive.
A touching picture that only a heart of stone, as Gerry so well puts it in another scene of the documentary, cannot feel moved. On my part, I feel so touched by it that I’ll use it again as you’ll see. Allow me to introduce, besides the stairs S and the garage G, yet another landmark: the window W.
From all this information, coming from the McCanns themselves, we can deduce that the Smith family crossed with the abductor somewhere in the area on the Rua da Escola Primária, just ahead of the Y-crossing with the Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz, as shown below:
allegedly] and then meticulously translated them, for a period of time that some say was more than reasonable.
They filmed this documentary in April/May 2009
By this time I may concede that they may not have translated ALL of the files (I, as a parent of an abducted child, would have translated double the amount of documentation in less than a week, but that’s me), but it must be assumed that they documented themselves thoroughly and adequately on anything intended to be put on film before doing so. Any excuse of changing events for reasons of lighting, better point of view, or other, reveals an unspeakable frivolity that could result, through reckless misleading, in the endangerment of Maddie’s life.
Let’s then see what the PJ files, that the McCanns translated and read, have to say about the Smith sighting. In pictures, so no translation is really required:
#1 – Clearly shows, by the letters P, M and A, the exact location where the man carrying a child was seen by the Smith family. I’ve added the location, up-street, of the where "my" garage G and window W are approximately located.
#2 – Shows, from the opposite angle of the previous picture, the locations of P, M and A. Notice that the man carrying a little girl had to have passed "my" window W before he ever passed by any of the Smiths.
#3 – Shows the Rua das Escola Primária from the T-crossing with Rua 25 de Abril. There can only be seen the P and M locations, as A is behind the photographer.
I’ve also put in, for reference, the "my" locations of the stairs S, garage G and window W. This picture confirms something that I’ve already stated in the previous post, and that is that from where this photograph is taken, anybody standing in the Rua da Escola Primária beyond the Y-crossing with Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz, is not seen, or, most likely, will go unnoticed, so can trace back his/her steps without anyone knowing better.
Himself has gracefully sent me and whom I thank. The pictures are NOT from the McCann documentary, I believe them to be from the Amaral one’s, which explains the adequate position in which the child is carried as well as the absence of any of the Smith family up where the McCanns decided to put them.
I think I do have to redefine my Green, Yellow and Red areas on that particular post. After all, the “safety” area is much larger than said.
#4 – Shows the T-crossing between Rua das Escola Primária with Rua 25 de Abril. Only the M and A locations are visible. No other relevant landmarks can be seen from here. On the left, just not seen, the top of the stairs that lead to Kelly’s Bar.
From these PJ pictures, we can clearly deduce that the Smith’s were broken up into three parties. In a previous post, I divided them as follows:
Logic dictates that this was the route of the man seen by the Smiths as per the PJ Files:
I have, up to now, limited myself to fact exposure. On one hand, those that the McCanns, out of their own free will, decided to show us, and on the other, those that are in the PJ files, which we believe have resulted from the various statements of the different members of the Smith family. And, believe it or not, they did not have anything read to them before so as to refresh their memory. Very few Countries have their police do that. Very, very few, but some do.
Now let’s look at the various existing discrepancies. A perfectly natural occurring phenomenon, as per that enlightened mind that had the luck and privilege to have found permanent residence inside Edgar’s cranium.
In my opinion there are FOUR relevant differences. Of these, TWO are intentional and purposefully misleading, while the other TWO are much more symptomatic than relevant in terms of misconstruction.
Before I go into each, I hope you noticed that when writing about the sighting under the McCann’s umbrella, I called him “the possible abductor”, while when referring to him the PJ files, it was “the man carrying a little girl”. As from now on, as we’re comparing both versions, so let me call him by what I think he really was: “The Stroller”
Small Misleading #1 – The Route
Per McCanns version, “The Stroller“ walks down the right hand side of the Rua da Escola Primária, while the PJ files show that he may have walked on its center, but when passing the P location, he did it walking on the left hand side of it:
For me, the reason for this difference is quite simple, you walk on the right hand side of the street, the furthest from the light, if you intend to be furtive, but you place yourself under the light if you wish to be seen. Simple and clear, no pun intended.
Small Misleading #2 – The Carrying
As I’ve shown in previous posts, the McCann version shows the girl being carried in a manner different from the described by the Smith’s (a living sleeping/sedated child) or from what was described by Tanner (a dead child), although more approximate to the latter than to the first.
This, together with the fact that the girl was barefooted while "The Stroller" was wearing a warm jacket, and she was blond and wearing a pyjamas, links her, without any shadow of a doubt with the disappearance of Madeleine Beth McCann from Apartment 5A of the Ocean Club that same evening/night.
The reason for this misleading, as I’ve also said, was to try to give credit to Tanner’s sighting. I had an aunt who had a farm, and there’s one thing she used to say that I treasure to this day, and that is “those who fear the rain most, are usually those that end up wet”[nota: Quem anda à chuva, molha-se! Antes Escorregar Do Pé Que Da Língua! e ainda, Após Uma Mentira, Vem Outra Ainda Maior!].
In trying too much to convey the idea that Jane was speaking truthfully (yes, Jane, we both know you were) they came up with the ONLY position in which the girl couldn’t be carried and… got “wet”.
If that isn’t fate, I don’t know what is.
Big Misleading #1 – The Smith Family
The McCanns show that they were bunched up together, as one single group going up the street. The PJ files clear and adamantly deny this.
The reason they are put altogether is of minor importance, and once again, much more symptomatic than relevant: to show that there was just one single, quick contact between “The Stroller” and the Smith family, and not a repetitive and persistent one as the PJ files really show happened.
What makes this to be a BIG misleading fact is that it’s a BLATANT and INTENTIONAL distortion of information. It’s disrespecting DELIBERATELY any possibility of helping the supposedly abducted child.
No, it’s NOT attributable to mistranslation. Images are an universal language, and that is the language that we’re seeing here distorted. THAT is what makes this a very SERIOUS and ABSOLUTELY UNEQUIVOCAL and WILFUL misleading.
You ONLY intentionally and UNEQUIVOCALLY mislead when you wish to LIE. And here the McCanns are LYING about the fate of THEIR OWN DAUGHTER. How more explicit can their guilt be? Are they able to deny anything I’ve said so far? Let me give you some news that you already know, they won’t also be able to deny anything I have to say next.
Big Misleading #2 – The Location
What can one say? It’s just a 40/50 metre discrepancy, in the stretch of a street that is no more 80/90 metres.
Even the McCanns, finding it completely unable to justify the contact between “The Stroller” and the Smith family as “accidental” they had to pull the encounter further up the road, so as to make any sense out of it’s intended fortuitousness.
How far up?
#9 again. It was taken from the Y-crossing between Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz and Rua da Escola Primária, around about when one becomes perceptible to anyone at the T-crossing down at the Rua 25 de Abril, where the A and M locations are as per PJ photos #3 and #4.
As the “possible abductor” is about to fade away, “the man carrying a little girl” hasn’t even begun to go past the first group of the Smith’s family.
Where one version has ended, the other hasn’t even begun:
So why fake it to where it was placed?
It would then be defensible to justify the whole encounter as accidental. This would remain very arguable, as it implies that the “possible abductor” must have to have been hearing his iPod in the loudest possible volume, for he was unable to hear the noises made by a numerous family of NINE just up ahead. But it would removes the entire absurdity of it, and THAT would be one huge positive step for the McCanns.
ANYWHERE else, THERE’S SIMPLY NO JUSTIFICATION for the encounter to have happened accidentally. And if it didn’t happen accidentally, then it could ONLY have happened intentionally. And the McCanns realized this at once.
Let me explain.
Let’s look, once again (I warned that I was going to use the picture many times…) at McCann picture #9:
The whole of the T-crossing between Rua da Escola Primária and Rua 25 de Abril is CLEARLY visible, as is the top of the stairs leading to Kelly’s Bar. No, no extra lighting was used, as is demonstrated by the single shadow of the road sign on the right.
Having come down from where in the Rua da Escola Primária, from where the Smiths were unable to see him, but from where could certainly hear them, he arrives at the Y-crossing. And this is what “The Stroller” sees before him:
It’s IMPRACTICABLE, UNREALISTIC, UNTHINKABLE, INCONCEIVABLE, OUT OF THE QUESTION, UNIMAGINABLE and HUMANLY INCREDIBLE for anyone with a dead/abducted child in their arms to opt to go down Rua the Escola Primária as “The Stoller” did.
In other words, one could almost say it would be IMPOSSIBLE to someone have done that.
Impossible? No, of course not. First because “The Stroller” DID opt for THAT, and second, almost all is possible when you set your mind to it, and he had set his mind that he had to be seen.
And he was seen. Just exaggerated a little, otherwise he wouldn’t have given anyone enough time to ask “is she asleep?”
All just a momentary lapse of reason, as only Himself could so concisely express the whole thing correctly:
Mind you, “a momentary lapse of reason” ONLY on the deciding to go strolling about, NOT about this misleading.
The lapse was fruit of arrogance and misconception of reality, and that will be for a later date. This misleading was conscious.
And criminal, as it clearly constitutes the perpetration obstruction of justice. Independent of justice herself seeking to be obstructed, like we know she was looking to be, as the common slut she’s demonstrated she's nothing but.
Debunking Body Disposal, Part II - The Beach
Clarifications on Body Disposal Debunking, Part I - The Church
Body Disposal Debunking, Part I - The Church
Make your comments at Textusa's house, thank you.
broadcast April 13, 2009, by TVI
broadcast May, 7 2009, by Channel 4