The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

Regards,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by suzyjohnson on 04.03.13 10:39

Hi, I have only just joined this forum but have read a bit about the case on the Mccann files. I hope this particular point hasn't already been discussed on another thread here -

On neither sticker book timeline does it mention that Jane actually walked from the Tapas bar round to her apartment twice on the evening of May 3rd - the first at 9.15 when she states that she saw Gerry talking to Jez, and then the 'abductor' - and then the second time when she went to take over from Russell so that he could return to have his meal.

In the confusion of that evening (on which I suspect most decisions were taken on the spur of the moment), was Jane actually supposed to say that she had seen the 'abductor' on her second walk round, which would have been between 9.40-10 pm, and therefore after Matthew had checked the Mccann children at 9.30pm?

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1034
Reputation : 165
Join date : 2013-03-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by tigger on 04.03.13 10:44

@suzyjohnson wrote:Hi, I have only just joined this forum but have read a bit about the case on the Mccann files. I hope this particular point hasn't already been discussed on another thread here -

On neither sticker book timeline does it mention that Jane actually walked from the Tapas bar round to her apartment twice on the evening of May 3rd - the first at 9.15 when she states that she saw Gerry talking to Jez, and then the 'abductor' - and then the second time when she went to take over from Russell so that he could return to have his meal.

In the confusion of that evening (on which I suspect most decisions were taken on the spur of the moment), was Jane actually supposed to say that she had seen the 'abductor' on her second walk round, which would have been between 9.40-10 pm, and therefore after Matthew had checked the Mccann children at 9.30pm?

A very interesting point. I think however that it wasn't accidental, but that the 9.15 time was chosen - there is no hard evidence that JT actually was there at that time - because Jeremy Wilkins could give Gerry a rock solid alibi for the time of the abduction. The only independent witness. All other evidence was from members of the group.
But I've never thought that a second sighting apart from the Smiths sighting was planned but that makes a lot of sense. Say a 9.45 sighting to lead on to the Smiths' sighting about 9.55. Ten minute walk.
Hello by the way. winkwink

____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by plebgate on 04.03.13 10:53

Hi suzy welcome.
Yes I remember reading it on a thread here last week.

plebgate

Posts : 5518
Reputation : 1255
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by Truthmustout on 04.03.13 10:54

I know many of the ppl believing the abduction story says that Jane was mistaken the time, that she saw the abductor at 2140 not 2115, giving the abductor a lot more time to do his thing than the 3 -5 minute time frame she has given by seeing him at 2115. And alos would fit better with the smith sighting. Tough I never heard Mccann assuming Jane Tanners time was wrong, so i can only assume its very important to have JW as a witness for Gerry at the same time as Jane "saw" the abductor.

Either way I do not believe Jane saw anyone at all. I dont believe the abduction story.

____________________
The tide is turning - justice is coming ! Freedom of speech for all !

Truthmustout

Posts : 128
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-02-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by PeterMac on 04.03.13 12:04

Which might be slightly credible if, like ordinary truthful witnesses, they had no real idea of when they went, what time it was, or much else.
Their problem is that they have tied themselves in knots and then nailed themselves to the floor with the incredible detail (9:04 by his watch, exactly five minutes later, exactly this, exactly that, 15 seconds to search the apartment (Kate) ten minutes for her to do so(Gerry) ) that what they are saying cannot be seen as merely getting it slightly wrong, it must be seen as deliberate falsehood.

____________________


PeterMac
Researcher

Posts : 10170
Reputation : 149
Join date : 2010-12-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by Guest on 04.03.13 12:22

http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3232p30-the-wilkins?highlight=jeremy

A link to a previous topic: Jeremy Wilkins was unable to state the precise time he met Gerry; 9.15 was chosen by the latter. It could have been up to half-an-hour earlier according to JW.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by tigger on 04.03.13 13:04

Moa-Vanilla wrote:I know many of the ppl believing the abduction story says that Jane was mistaken the time, that she saw the abductor at 2140 not 2115, giving the abductor a lot more time to do his thing than the 3 -5 minute time frame she has given by seeing him at 2115. And alos would fit better with the smith sighting. Tough I never heard Mccann assuming Jane Tanners time was wrong, so i can only assume its very important to have JW as a witness for Gerry at the same time as Jane "saw" the abductor.

Either way I do not believe Jane saw anyone at all. I dont believe the abduction story.

I'm with Joanna (unterdenteppichgekehrt) -her theory that JT was asked to testify to seeing an abductor at 9.15 after Gerry had met the 9 members of the Smiths family, who spoke to him and saw him from every conceivable angle - the family being spread out over the road. He urgently needed proof of not being there. What would be easier than using the truly accidental meeting with JW to provide an alibi?

Supporting this theory are the following:
Gerry wore a watch and would have known exactly what time he met JW - I believe 9.15 was the latest he could stretch it.
JW complained that he was contacted several times by the McCanns I believe to agree to the above time. There were also two other witnesses who complained of feeling 'like pawns in a game' they were contacted so often by TM - Jean might know. yes
The curious visit at 1.00 am 4/5 to JW telling him Maddie had disappeared but his services weren't required.
The Smith sighting was ignored by TM and the distance between 5a and the spot where he met the Smiths was doubled by TM. The distance iirc is about 1.6 miles by car, but 800 yrds. on foot. I'd have to do a bit of searching, but the relevant statements are there. I don't know when these statements re the distance came up, I expect after the Smiths' sighting became public.

The Smiths were contacted by Brian Kennedy in September, after they had identified the man they saw as around 80% likely to be Gerry.

JT wouldn't have lied about what she saw - in principle - if she delivered her daughter to be carried through PdL as a decoy, which is what I think is quite possible, she would have seen more or less what she described. She was seen - or at least a woman in a purple top was seen around 5a at that time.
More support I find in the fact that the Eggman is described wearing beige trousers and dark top, same as the Smith family did. That would make sense, as the aim was to connect the two sightings.

So in short, JT wasn't supposed to be anywhere near 5a at 9.15, she was due there around half an hour later. Only the time was moved - giving Gerry a good alibi - the Smith sighting had to be ignored as it might be dynamite. Which it was.

On top of that the beige trousers thrown on the bed in the first photograph, the PJ having asked a guest in a bar what Gerry was wearing (jeans) I'm pretty convinced this is it. Beige trousers disappeared in the second photograph. Trousers with buttons as the Smiths described - Gerry is seen wearing these in a photograph taken later. Were they ever seen after September 07?

The Smiths' sighting appears in the book as one of the many the PJ ignored. Well, well, it's all in the PJ files thank goodness.



____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by bobbin on 04.03.13 13:35

@tigger wrote:
Moa-Vanilla wrote:I know many of the ppl believing the abduction story says that Jane was mistaken the time, that she saw the abductor at 2140 not 2115, giving the abductor a lot more time to do his thing than the 3 -5 minute time frame she has given by seeing him at 2115. And alos would fit better with the smith sighting. Tough I never heard Mccann assuming Jane Tanners time was wrong, so i can only assume its very important to have JW as a witness for Gerry at the same time as Jane "saw" the abductor.

Either way I do not believe Jane saw anyone at all. I dont believe the abduction story.

I'm with Joanna (unterdenteppichgekehrt) -her theory that JT was asked to testify to seeing an abductor at 9.15 after Gerry had met the 9 members of the Smiths family, who spoke to him and saw him from every conceivable angle - the family being spread out over the road. He urgently needed proof of not being there. What would be easier than using the truly accidental meeting with JW to provide an alibi?

Supporting this theory are the following:
Gerry wore a watch and would have known exactly what time he met JW - I believe 9.15 was the latest he could stretch it.
JW complained that he was contacted several times by the McCanns I believe to agree to the above time. There were also two other witnesses who complained of feeling 'like pawns in a game' they were contacted so often by TM - Jean might know.
The curious visit at 1.00 am 4/5 to JW telling him Maddie had disappeared but his services weren't required.
The Smith sighting was ignored by TM and the distance between 5a and the spot where he met the Smiths was doubled by TM. The distance iirc is about 1.6 miles by car, but 800 yrds. on foot. I'd have to do a bit of searching, but the relevant statements are there. I don't know when these statements re the distance came up, I expect after the Smiths' sighting became public.

The Smiths were contacted by Brian Kennedy in September, after they had identified the man they saw as around 80% likely to be Gerry.

JT wouldn't have lied about what she saw - in principle - if she delivered her daughter to be carried through PdL as a decoy, which is what I think is quite possible, she would have seen more or less what she described. She was seen - or at least a woman in a purple top was seen around 5a at that time.
More support I find in the fact that the Eggman is described wearing beige trousers and dark top, same as the Smith family did. That would make sense, as the aim was to connect the two sightings.

So in short, JT wasn't supposed to be anywhere near 5a at 9.15, she was due there around half an hour later. Only the time was moved - giving Gerry a good alibi - the Smith sighting had to be ignored as it might be dynamite. Which it was.

On top of that the beige trousers thrown on the bed in the first photograph, the PJ having asked a guest in a bar what Gerry was wearing (jeans) I'm pretty convinced this is it. Beige trousers disappeared in the second photograph. Trousers with buttons as the Smiths described - Gerry is seen wearing these in a photograph taken later. Were they ever seen after September 07?

The Smiths' sighting appears in the book as one of the many the PJ ignored. Well, well, it's all in the PJ files thank goodness.


tigger, moa-vanilla, good post and made me think. Jez Wilkins states that he saw the woman in purple when he left his flat. He says it was about 8.15 to 8.30. The woman was looking straight at 5a. He later discovered she was Jane Tanner. It's in his statement.
So this should have been the time she was just going down to dinner, the night the Paynes were apparently arriving late around 9 ish.
Then Tanner went back to relieve Russell, who was with his daughter being sick and changing her sheets.
Gerry arrived at dinner some time before Kate, and was speaking with the Carpenters I believe. He says he was with (one of the other men, (if Russell was not at dinner that night and Payne had not yet arrived it would have to be Matt) it's in one of his statements I believe, will go look) JW I am sure said right early on that he had seen Gerry by the shutters fiddling with them. This has gone. So Kate will have arrived after Gerry at dinner, if the former is correct. Then the tapas staff say that they heard noises in the bushes around 9.40 / 9.45. The Carpenters also agree the time was before 10 when they heard calling for Madeleine. This puts the timeline a lot earlier. If Tanner knew she'd been seen by Jez, she'd need to have 'seen him'. So the 'Gerry alibi and Jez' gets confused in with the later timing of Smith's with memories of Gerry, buttoned trousers etc.

bobbin

Posts : 2031
Reputation : 127
Join date : 2011-12-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by Truthmustout on 04.03.13 16:59

@tigger wrote:
Moa-Vanilla wrote:I know many of the ppl believing the abduction story says that Jane was mistaken the time, that she saw the abductor at 2140 not 2115, giving the abductor a lot more time to do his thing than the 3 -5 minute time frame she has given by seeing him at 2115. And alos would fit better with the smith sighting. Tough I never heard Mccann assuming Jane Tanners time was wrong, so i can only assume its very important to have JW as a witness for Gerry at the same time as Jane "saw" the abductor.

Either way I do not believe Jane saw anyone at all. I dont believe the abduction story.

I'm with Joanna (unterdenteppichgekehrt) -her theory that JT was asked to testify to seeing an abductor at 9.15 after Gerry had met the 9 members of the Smiths family, who spoke to him and saw him from every conceivable angle - the family being spread out over the road. He urgently needed proof of not being there. What would be easier than using the truly accidental meeting with JW to provide an alibi?

Supporting this theory are the following:
Gerry wore a watch and would have known exactly what time he met JW - I believe 9.15 was the latest he could stretch it.
JW complained that he was contacted several times by the McCanns I believe to agree to the above time. There were also two other witnesses who complained of feeling 'like pawns in a game' they were contacted so often by TM - Jean might know. yes
The curious visit at 1.00 am 4/5 to JW telling him Maddie had disappeared but his services weren't required.
The Smith sighting was ignored by TM and the distance between 5a and the spot where he met the Smiths was doubled by TM. The distance iirc is about 1.6 miles by car, but 800 yrds. on foot. I'd have to do a bit of searching, but the relevant statements are there. I don't know when these statements re the distance came up, I expect after the Smiths' sighting became public.

The Smiths were contacted by Brian Kennedy in September, after they had identified the man they saw as around 80% likely to be Gerry.

JT wouldn't have lied about what she saw - in principle - if she delivered her daughter to be carried through PdL as a decoy, which is what I think is quite possible, she would have seen more or less what she described. She was seen - or at least a woman in a purple top was seen around 5a at that time.
More support I find in the fact that the Eggman is described wearing beige trousers and dark top, same as the Smith family did. That would make sense, as the aim was to connect the two sightings.

So in short, JT wasn't supposed to be anywhere near 5a at 9.15, she was due there around half an hour later. Only the time was moved - giving Gerry a good alibi - the Smith sighting had to be ignored as it might be dynamite. Which it was.

On top of that the beige trousers thrown on the bed in the first photograph, the PJ having asked a guest in a bar what Gerry was wearing (jeans) I'm pretty convinced this is it. Beige trousers disappeared in the second photograph. Trousers with buttons as the Smiths described - Gerry is seen wearing these in a photograph taken later. Were they ever seen after September 07?

The Smiths' sighting appears in the book as one of the many the PJ ignored. Well, well, it's all in the PJ files thank goodness.



Im with you on the idea . When I said I don't think JT saw anyone I ment a real abductor as described from TM. And I also often wonder how little they have used the smith sighting compered to the JT sighting. It took years before they talked About the smith sighting, because they felt they had to IMO , still JT has been their main focus. I also can't let go of JT toung slip when she says 'I carried' in the interview. And how they made Jw feel so uncomfortable by contacting him about his sighting over and over as he states In his statement to the police.

I remember when I first took a deeper interest in this case, I felt Jane and David was somehow deep into the scam and I also believed they where a couple until I found out they where not. Still I feel there is something about those two that I can't put my finger on.
I often wonder at that time maybe not all where involved, and later on maybe realized they had been fooled. And then it was to late, or they had to protect their partner beeing involved...

The only thing I have always been sure on is that Kate and Gerry are lying ,and that their story don't add up at all.imo .

Good post tigger !

____________________
The tide is turning - justice is coming ! Freedom of speech for all !

Truthmustout

Posts : 128
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-02-08

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by suzyjohnson on 04.03.13 18:10

Thanks for your replies, I am just trying out ideas, seeing what fits and what doesn't. I was thinking that Jane might have made a mistake, that Gerry expected her to say she had seen the 'abductor' at a later time, after 9.30pm, but then I checked Gerry's first interview and he makes a point of saying that Jane had seen the 'abductor' at 9.15pm. So, whether or not Jane's witness statement was true, the time agreed between the Tapas group of her sighting, was, as Tigger says, 9.15pm.

What I think would be really useful, if there isn't one already, is a timeline thread which lists only the statements of all the independent witness, to see exactly where the Tapas group story fits (or doesn't fit) within it.

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1034
Reputation : 165
Join date : 2013-03-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by tigger on 04.03.13 18:41

@suzyjohnson wrote:Thanks for your replies, I am just trying out ideas, seeing what fits and what doesn't. I was thinking that Jane might have made a mistake, that Gerry expected her to say she had seen the 'abductor' at a later time, after 9.30pm, but then I checked Gerry's first interview and he makes a point of saying that Jane had seen the 'abductor' at 9.15pm. So, whether or not Jane's witness statement was true, the time agreed between the Tapas group of her sighting, was, as Tigger says, 9.15pm.

What I think would be really useful, if there isn't one already, is a timeline thread which lists only the statements of all the independent witness, to see exactly where the Tapas group story fits (or doesn't fit) within it.

Here is one, with the Joanna reference. http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t5570-timeline-evening-3-5-07-as-from-800-pm

All the timelines are very interesting. Including the ones after they came back from Portugal. See the Timelines forum on the Homepage.
this one is good too:
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t5512-the-rothley-meeting-a-turning-point?highlight=rothley+meeting

Happy reading! thumbup


____________________
Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'entrate.

tigger

Posts : 8114
Reputation : 38
Join date : 2011-07-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by suzyjohnson on 05.03.13 9:15

Ok, thanks Tigger

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1034
Reputation : 165
Join date : 2013-03-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by russiandoll on 16.03.13 13:41

Maybe not important, but has there ever been a question asking, or an explanation given for, why Jane Tanner, whilst not wanting to distress Kate with the news that she might have seen Maddie being abducted, did not ask whichever person was tasked with phoning the police to tell the police THEN about the possible abductor with her descriptions of the man and child, rather than wait until the police arrived quite some time later ?

____________________



             The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate,
contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and
unrealistic.
~John F. Kennedy


russiandoll

Posts : 3942
Reputation : 9
Join date : 2011-09-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by plebgate on 16.03.13 14:06

That's a very good point Russian Doll. How many more freakin good points must be made before someone sits up and takes notice? I like to think maybe somebody is but if they are they're taking a whole lot of time about it.

plebgate

Posts : 5518
Reputation : 1255
Join date : 2013-02-01

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by jd on 16.03.13 14:52

@russiandoll wrote:Maybe not important, but has there ever been a question asking, or an explanation given for, why Jane Tanner, whilst not wanting to distress Kate with the news that she might have seen Maddie being abducted, did not ask whichever person was tasked with phoning the police to tell the police THEN about the possible abductor with her descriptions of the man and child, rather than wait until the police arrived quite some time later ?

There is this rather brilliant anaylse on a major contradiction of the sticker book timeline (probably by Paolo Reiss or Textusa or someone, can't remember).......

Firstly let me set the scene, this extract from Amaral's book: Two contradictory lists and a torn children's book. At the time, Russell O'Brien handed over two lists handwritten on the inside cover of a children's book, a sticker activity book for children more than 3 years of age. We believe the book was Madeleine's and we do not understand why they tore off the cover of the child's book. A child had just gone missing and all its belongings should be precious to those who loved her. Was there really no other paper around? Not even a simple napkin? The question hangs in the air and the response is yet another contradiction. The lists contained the possible record of the checks in the apartment.

The next Extract from Russell O'Brien's Rogatory interview does give us two pieces of information, one extremely important piece of information is that it places Gerry McCann in the apartment at the time O'Brien was writing the timeline, at the same table in fact, and the other: "I thought it was a cereal box" is worth remembering.

But it is the time that is the critical component in all this. In response to a question from Leicester police.

Reply Russell O'Brien........ at some stage sort of quietened off and the, the PJ sat down with, you know, came in and sat down with Gerry....(I thought) that we were writing on the back of a piece of card,I thought it was a cereal box but obviously it was a children’s book, that (it) was written with me sat at the table in Kate and Gerry’s room. Gerry by this point had certainly calmed down but was, his head was just on the table, you know, like that, he was just staring at the, at the table, very, very quiet and very, very low.

1578....
LP. “Was the first attempt, the earlier attempt as you say. When was this drafted up”?

Reply Russell O'Brien
Erm this was drafted er *around the time that the initial pair of Officers from the PJ came to 5A. I can certainly recall writing some of this, I think perhaps the neat, maybe the neater version erm sat down at the table in Gerry’s flat...

Let us now look at some bits from Jane Tanner's Rogatory statements.

I didn’t want to say to Kate at that point, which might sound odd now, you know, ‘Oh why wouldn’t you say straight away to Kate’, but, you know, the thought of telling the mother of a child that you might have seen being carried away is, it’s too horrible to even say.

The nitty gritty.

JT.......And then I think they, Russell was there when I spoke to the PJ, because I can remember Russell coming in with me when I spoke to the PJ, because there was Russell and Gerry was there as well in the apartment when I spoke to the PJ. And that was the first time I’d ever been into their, into Kate and Gerry’s apartment through the whole week, I hadn’t, it might seem like, but we hadn’t really been into their apartment before”.

4078 “Sorry, was that on the night that Madeleine had disappeared?”

Reply “That was at three o’clock in the morning after she’d disappeared, yeah”.

LP. "So when you went into Gerry and Kate’s apartment who else was there?”

JT. “Erm, I think there was Russ, I think Russell came with me and there was Sylvie who was the translator. I can’t remember which, there was some, there was a PJ chap was sitting on the, by the table. And there was Gerry who was standing by the, the bedroom door”.

LP. “And how was Gerry at that point?”

JT.“Oh he was just, well obviously, obviously distraught. And I think it was quite hard for me to be saying at that, you know, looking in his face and to be explaining what I’d seen, at that point was quite hard because, you know, Gerry was obviously standing there, I don’t know whether, and you sort of think ‘Oh God, here’s me, if I’d tried to stop them this wouldn’t have happened’ sort of thing. So I think I did feel sort of a bit obviously guilty at that stage even though I didn’t know whether it was anything, but obviously you think ‘Oh bloody hell, what if I’ not stopped it happened potentially”.

LP. “And what was Gerry’s reaction to what you said?”

JT. “Well I don’t even know whether he took it in, I mean, he was just, he was, you know, obviously just standing there looking absolutely horrified, so”.

4078 “And where was Kate?”.....

Short ending.

Prior to the PJ arriving at 12:40/12:50 Russell O'Brien has written the timeline for them all, including, "Jane tanner sees stranger walking carrying child." He does this while Gerry McCann sits at the same table.

However according to Jane Tanners RI, At three o' clock in the morning Jane Tanner informs Gerry McCann for the first time, about the existence of a possible abductor. Gerry looks horrified upon hearing this.

Madeleine has been snatched, don't forget Kate knew this instantly, Madeleine has been snatched, Tanner has witnessed a man carrying a child in the vicinity of the apartment just prior to Madeleine being discovered gone, and tries to tell us, and the PJ of course, that she waited five hours before she informed the parents for fear of upsetting them.

Why do I have trouble believing this?


Long ending.

Firstly let me dispense with the book.

Having read all that O'Brien has to say I would have difficulty in believing that Monday followed Sunday if such statement came from his lips, but for once and for purposes of this article I shall go with one sentence being the truth.

"I thought it was a cereal box but obviously it was a children’s book."

At first glance it might not seem so terribly important but it does bother me somewhat and makes me ask who handed the torn book to O'Brien, who would feel comfortable enough to tear up a book belonging to a child, someone else's child and a recently "abducted" child to boot? How likely is it that one of the Tapas Seven would tear up a book belonging to Madeleine? for all their faults I would say they have enough social graces that to do such a thing would be abhorrent and totally alien to them, who then?

Well it can't have been Gerry can it? because according to Jane Tanner she didn't inform McCann until three in the morning that she had in fact seen a possible abductor.

But that begs another question, especially with Gerry being placed in the apartment at the time.

How did O'Brien and Co. conjure up so surreptitiously the timeline, commit it all to paper duly noting Tanner's 9.20pm sighting of the possible abductor without the knowledge of Gerry McCann who was, at the very time the timeline was being drafted ,was sat with his head resting on the same table.........It's all a mystery to me.

____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare

jd

Posts : 4152
Reputation : 15
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by jd on 16.03.13 15:10

And this is how the UK's pathetic & spineless press reported & twisted it... "written on A childs sticker book"


____________________
Who pulled the strings?...THE SYMINGTONS..And the Scottish connections...Look no further if you dare

jd

Posts : 4152
Reputation : 15
Join date : 2011-07-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Jane Tanner and Sticker Book Timelines

Post by Nina on 16.03.13 15:20

The McCanns very rarely, if at all say anything other than 'we are innocent' but they get others to spout and also to write. Clever. notme

____________________
Not one more cent from me.

Nina

Posts : 2694
Reputation : 237
Join date : 2011-06-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Jane Tanner and sticker book timelines

Post by suzyjohnson on 16.03.13 21:05

Whose writing is it actually on the two different sticker book timelines?
One, presumably, is Russell, but the other?

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1034
Reputation : 165
Join date : 2013-03-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum