Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN

by Guest 09.06.13 0:26

suzyjohnson wrote:I was just taking another look at that documentary reconstruction mentioned earlier. Returning to apartment 5A, Gerry is talking about the events of May 3rd. He says,, 'we obviously, absolutely, what's the word, persecuted ourselves for not being here, and there is no doubt that not being here at that moment increased the risk of it.'

I am sure this has been picked up on before, but to me it doesn't sound as though he is talking about an abduction here, for two reasons. Firstly, the problem was not that they were not there 'at that moment' but as they frequently tell us, that they had not been there on any evening, thereby allowing an abductor to track their movements all week. Secondly, GM talks about an 'increased risk' whilst they were not there, yet if they had been in 5A there would have been virtually NO risk of an abductor casually walking through the lounge at 9pm.

But then if you think in terms of something a young child might do, like fall off some furniture, or take some tablets etc. then in that case there would be more or less risk of that happening, depending on whether the parents were in the next room?

He viewed his daughter, considered how lucky he was, met Jez and chatted as JT passed by and noticed his daughter being abducted. So he was "right there" at the "moment" after all.

by View-from-Ireland 09.06.13 0:37

I have always found it so convenient that he had his proud father moment literally a few minutes before his daughter was 'abducted'.

Doesn't it not seem somewhat contrived?

by Ayniia 09.06.13 0:40

View-from-Ireland wrote:I have always found it so convenient that he had his proud father moment literally a few minutes before his daughter was 'abducted'.

Doesn't it not seem somewhat contrived?

He surely didn't had a moment like that in the bus when he made the famous comment.

by marconi 09.06.13 4:33

"I looked down an I saw how beautiful she was..."

happened a few hours after "I have'd the best day ever".

by AskTheDogsSandra 09.06.13 6:32

marconi wrote:"I looked down an I saw how beautiful she was..."

happened a few hours after "I have'd the best day ever".

And they all lived happily ever after.

Well, except Maddie.

Oh, but then even she's being treated like a princess.

by aiyoyo 09.06.13 7:39

I cant remember whether I've posted this thought before: -

If JT's reason for delay in telling Mccanns about her sighting was because she didn't want to upset them, what could Russell's reason be for not telling Gerry or Kate?

They would have us believe it is a telepathy communication between JT and Russell I suppose!

by sammyc 09.06.13 10:41

Has anyone any thoughts on what prompted ROB to write Ella's name on the first timeline and then strike through her name? Why was Ella in his immediate thoughts?

by View-from-Ireland 09.06.13 10:55

sammyc wrote:Has anyone any thoughts on what prompted ROB to write Ella's name on the first timeline and then strike through her name? Why was Ella in his immediate thoughts?

That is very odd. it has prompted various theories which I can't now find.

Some have speculated that Ella was a twin of Maddie, others that she had been used as a 'stand-in' Maddie at various times during the holiday due to lack of witnesses of the two girls together.

I don't know what the significance of it it. Maybe the children were altogether except Maddie and Ella? Didn't the other bed look more 'slept-in' than Madeleine's? Perhaps Ella did something to Maddie? I think it is worthy of a police question but as my own answers prove it is dangerous to go making theories based on no evidence except the striking off of one girl's name.

by Guest 09.06.13 11:14

Just for reference...

The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN - Page 3 Timeline040507a

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html

The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN - Page 3 Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRFSLfazJDHhByuUkgnt4ikeS5yuaacu5lV2TOr3u2KRJzL82p_9w

The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN - Page 3 Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRFSLfazJDHhByuUkgnt4ikeS5yuaacu5lV2TOr3u2KRJzL82p_9w

Note, Ella crossed out twice on top timeline.

by Guest 09.06.13 11:25

View-from-Ireland wrote:I have always found it so convenient that he had his proud father moment literally a few minutes before his daughter was 'abducted'.

Doesn't it not seem somewhat contrived?

It's as believable as Kate's saccharine-laden account of family life and how wonderful the holiday had been until the fateful evening; all a complete fabrication as far as I'm concerned.

I know I'm a pedantic old so-and-so but I noticed on the timelines that Gerry's name is also spelled as Jerry and then at the end given as Gerald - which apparently (like Maddie!) he was never known as.

Odd.

by Guest 09.06.13 11:34

The oddest thing for me is that the check of 5A at approx. 9:30 is completely missing from the neatly written down 2nd version. And whereas all "participants" are now referred with their proper first and last name, Matt Oldfield has gone completely "missing" too ...

by **PeterMac** 09.06.13 11:38

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:
It's as believable as Kate's saccharine-laden account of family life and how wonderful the holiday had been until the fateful evening; all a complete fabrication as far as I'm concerned.
I know I'm a pedantic old so-and-so but I noticed on the timelines that Gerry's name is also spelled as Jerry and then at the end given as Gerald - which apparently (like Maddie!) he was never known as.
Odd.

Don't expect it to make sense. You need third-of-a-million pound lawyers for that.

by Liz Eagles 09.06.13 11:41

PeterMac wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:
It's as believable as Kate's saccharine-laden account of family life and how wonderful the holiday had been until the fateful evening; all a complete fabrication as far as I'm concerned.
I know I'm a pedantic old so-and-so but I noticed on the timelines that Gerry's name is also spelled as Jerry and then at the end given as Gerald - which apparently (like Maddie!) he was never known as.
Odd.
Don't expect it to make sense. You need third-of-a-million pound lawyers for that.

and a great deal of sponsorship from.........

by bobbin 09.06.13 12:04

Châtelaine wrote:The oddest thing for me is that the check of 5A at approx. 9:30 is completely missing from the neatly written down 2nd version. And whereas all "participants" are now referred with their proper first and last name, Matt Oldfield has gone completely "missing" too ...

Particularly interesting is this:
Matt Oldfield in his statement says (not verbatim) that about 9.30 he entered by the patio doors, looked into the children's bedroom, and saw the twins, but didn't see if Maddy was in her bed.
The door opens in such a way, that he would have had to have seen PAST Maddy's bed to look in around the door to see the cots, presumably, but not necessarily, with the twins in their cots.
The cots had deep sides, one opaque.
If he could not see Maddy, it would be because of the dark. If it was dark, how would he see the twins.
If it was light because the window had been forced open after the shutters had been jemmied open, then he would have noticed it was light and would have been able to see Maddy's bed, either empty or with her in it, except that Jane had already seen the egg man with a child.
So, Matt, what is it?
A long while back I also recall somewhere that Matt had stayed a while, on his check, and was looking at books on a book shelf, to see if there was any good holiday reading.(does anyone else remember this. It might have been 3 arguidos time. I certainly remember thinking, it's the end of the holiday, is 'now' the time to start looking for 'holiday reading'.
Well, there was no bookshelf which he was looking at (perhaps the fictitious one with Cuddle cat placed high on it that Kate knew instantly meant that Maddie had been abducted).
He also got it wrong about the number of windows in the McCann children's room, there being one, and not the two he referred to.
So again, Matt, were you there at all. In the first time sheet you are, in the second you are not.
You have signed a police statement saying that you saw the twins around 9.30, yet you describe a room which is not the same as the 5A room.
I would bend over backwards to believe you, but somehow, your very own words prevent me from going to all of the effort of putting my spine out.
Which is it, did you do a half hourly check as claimed by the McCanns, or is this all a big lie? The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN - Page 3 3139096799

The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN - Page 3 3139096799

by Guest 09.06.13 12:55

I'm still "impressed", Bobbin, that Matt had the courage to go to PdL for the mockumentary and repeat his nonsense on camera ...

by View-from-Ireland 09.06.13 13:50

Châtelaine wrote:I'm still "impressed", Bobbin, that Matt had the courage to go to PdL for the mockumentary and repeat his nonsense on camera ...

And Tanner should also get an honorary mention.

Some BS spouted by that lot.

This is worth another look, from about 5.30 in. At 7.48 he even pulls his ear as he says 'I just thought how beautiful she was'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atfDV7imHHY

by Lance De Boils 10.06.13 20:46

What I've always found peculiar about those timelines is the use of Gerry's surname. Why bother putting "Gerry McCann" when he was the only Gerry in the group?
Then writing Gerald at the bottom, as well as the Gerry/Jerry spellings.

Now, if there was a SECOND "Jerry" in the group, it would make sense, as they would need to differentiate between the two....

[ETA: I realise that on the "2nd" timeline, all of their surnames are given, but I was honing in on Gerry because of the Gerry/Jerry/Gerald peculiarity.]

by Guest 10.06.13 21:02

Lance De Boils wrote:What I've always found peculiar about those timelines is the use of Gerry's surname. Why bother putting "Gerry McCann" when he was the only Gerry in the group?
Then writing Gerald at the bottom, as well as the Gerry/Jerry spellings.

Now, if there was a SECOND "Jerry" in the group, it would make sense, as they would need to differentiate between the two....

[ETA: I realise that on the "2nd" timeline, all of their surnames are given, but I was honing in on Gerry because of the Gerry/Jerry/Gerald peculiarity.]

Or...:"why bother putting "Gerry McCann", when he was the only McCann in the group?

parapono

by Praiaaa 10.06.13 21:17

I don't know why anyone bothers trying to make sense of the timeline as reported by the Tapasniks - the PJ stated very clearly in the arguido-isation document that it made no sense, and they did not believe it. SY will not believe it either, no-one who saw it would.

by suzyjohnson 11.06.13 0:29

[quote="Lance De Boils"]What I've always found peculiar about those timelines is the use of Gerry's surname. Why bother putting "Gerry McCann" when he was the only Gerry in the group?

Yes Lance, I hadn't noticed that before but it is odd.

Do we know who actually did write these two timelines. I think two different people writing at the same time, whilst several group members were discussing things. That way, different points would have been noted as they were going along.

I would be interested to know exactly how the two notes ended up in the hands of the PJ, were they handed over, did the PJ pick them up from a table or somewhere?

by aiyoyo 11.06.13 5:29

Lance De Boils wrote:What I've always found peculiar about those timelines is the use of Gerry's surname. Why bother putting "Gerry McCann" when he was the only Gerry in the group?
Then writing Gerald at the bottom, as well as the Gerry/Jerry spellings.

Now, if there was a SECOND "Jerry" in the group, it would make sense, as they would need to differentiate between the two....

[ETA: I realise that on the "2nd" timeline, all of their surnames are given, but I was honing in on Gerry because of the Gerry/Jerry/Gerald peculiarity.]

Likely because they meant it as official piece of document meant for the Officials thus was formal about it. Gerald is likely how Gerry sign off formal letters.

Just goes to prove the whole lot or at least one of them was deliberate in their conscientious effort to fabricate evidence for the Police.

by **Jill Havern** 11.06.13 8:28

The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN - Page 3 Timeli10

The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN - Page 3 Timeli11

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html

by dragonfly 30.10.13 1:16

is their creche records for the evening available? The janner tanner sighting has been 'found ' to be a british man with a two year old

now if you look at old reports

I can't put image up it went from egg man to Robert Murrat to portuguese oddball to British man now eliminated

snip

]McCann family friend says sketch 'strongly resembles' man she saw carrying a child wearing pyjamas identical to Madeleine's on the night of the abduction[/size][/size][/size]

Charlotte Pennington, a nanny at the Ocean Club holiday complex where the McCanns were staying, told police last May she saw Murat chatting to "a man aged around 27 to 35, average height, very dark eyes and of Portuguese or Spanish appearance"

The sketch was based on the evidence of a British tourist who came forward saying she had seen a "creepy man"

Grandmother Gail Cooper, who was staying just 500 yards from Gerry and Kate McCanns' holiday apartment, told police how she came face to face with the "disturbing" man hanging around the resort three times.

Based on her descriptions, an FBI-trained artist produced a likeness of the suspect whom British and Portuguese police and Interpol were desperately trying to trace last night.
The sketch bears a striking resemblance to an image of a man seen by family friend, Jane Tanner carrying a child away on the night Madeleine vanished on May 3

[/size]
will the portuguse have access to the photo of the british manwho has been eliminated ?
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-509285/Robert-Murat-seen-talking-man-matching-artists-impression-Madeleine-suspect.html#ixzz2jACOM1zs

by suzyjohnson 30.10.13 4:47

It would certainly be interesting to see those evening creche records. The police said there were 11 children from 8 families there that night. Crecheman would have to be a British man who left the creche at around 9.05 pm - 9.10 pm.

In the same way that JW and GM didn't notice JT or Crecheman, it seems that Crecheman didn't see the three of them either.

I wonder why SY felt the need to show us all a photo of Crecheman on Crimewatch, why noy just say he had been found and eliminated from the enquiry and leave it at that? IMO there is much more going on behind the scenes at the moment than we know about.

by **tigger** 30.10.13 6:15

Get 'em Gonçalo wrote:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html

Seeing those again it seems to me fairly clear that these weren't meant for the police but a hurried attempt to fit in the changes to a verbal arrangement.

All the 'evidence' is there.
The first list much as it was first decided, simple to remember by heart and the second one with the changes.
All still hinged on the shutter, without that 'all shutters down' ( note ALL) .
RM when asked, dutifully says that the patio door shutters were closed.