Re: CRIMEWATCH ON BBC ***Part 1 DISCUSSION****

by nomendelta 14.10.13 21:50

On the one hand the "night creche man" is incredibly convenient but on the other hand...pointing out there was an actual night creche does make one question why the tapas crew would choose to leave there kids unattended.

by JackieL 14.10.13 21:50

MoonGoddess wrote:The only positive thing I took out of that was that for some reason they didn't name/or include the paynes..... the other Tapas crew were all named???

Funny the 6.30 visit by David Payne - last witness other than the parents to see Madeleine alive - is left OUT.

Commentary mentions: "Matt Rachel Oldfield Jane Tanner and Russell O'brian " others referred to "remaining 3 people"

by bunglebonce 14.10.13 21:50

Nothing about this sits right with me, so many options to think about - so much missed out!!!

I have been viewing various twitters and boards during this broadcast, all saying much the same - Whitewash!

Are people being set up to fall on their own sword??

Watching the McCann's, I see the usual prepared and learnt act, as each one speaks, the other keeps a steady side gaze - very intense - the downward looking, turn and closure of eyes when they speak, they are so bloody dodgy!! I have worked with the police, there is no way they can be dismissing these two as non-suspects!

As a side, Thank you to all you hard workers and knowledge keepers on here that have kept me informed of facts and creating a sensible easy to follow board!!

by MRNOODLES 14.10.13 21:50

MoonGoddess wrote:I got a bit lost in my anger....... so what time is the supposed disappearance meant to have taken place?

Chico Time

by Wahrheit 14.10.13 21:50

russiandoll wrote:

2. The 10pm sighting was incorrectly believed to be Mr McCann by the witness.
We have established from other witness evidence that Mr McCann was not at that location at that time. [ so please stop doubting the abduction theory]

The elephant in the room

by MoonGoddess 14.10.13 21:52

russiandoll wrote:
MoonGoddess wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:
JackieL wrote:WHO are the family at the evening creche who say they were carrying back their child? WHY were they taking that route? Team McCann realises Bundleman sighting makes their story implausible, so suddenly Bundleman has NOTHING to do with Madeleine???????
Seriously, I don't believe the night creche man. It's too convenient, it smells of BS.
I think there could be a night crèche man, but NO WAY would he have been travelling in the direction that JT saw him...
why do you say that ?

I holidayed in the OC in August 2007, I was in an apartment right opposite 5a, if he had come from the crèche he would be walking towards 5a not away from it

by Daisy 14.10.13 21:52

MaryB wrote:What exactly is the new evidence. I've watched it but didn't see any new evidence being presented. What is the revelation. I read it was to be a long and detailed reconstruction lasting 25 minutes. That was nonsense for a start. It wasn't what I'd call a a reconstruction. Just the parents being interviewed most of the time.
I think somebody will come forward as the man the Smiths saw and he will be written of like the person Jane Tanner saw.

The revelation is that the suspect Jane Tanner saw was just a bloke carrying his child home from the night creche.

Load of bo**ocks! Why would it take over 6 years for them to come forward. I'm disgusted with the whole charade.

by Beanie 14.10.13 21:52

I have never seen a more cold hearted pair of parents in my life. It is all me me me.

Reading the twitter posts I don't think anyone is buying it.

by russiandoll 14.10.13 21:52

ShuBob wrote:
russiandoll wrote:
Wahrheit wrote:"SY have done a great job": Gerry
I think maybe they have. It aint over til the fat lady sings.

Did Redwood diss the PJ?

There is A LOT imo going on behind the scenes.
Thanks russiandoll for still being optimistic as I am. It's not easy being optimistic in the circumstances.

I did not expect Redwood or the reconstruction to go into the timeline details in 25 minutes. The reconstruction did not last long at all, it was interspersed with interview clips.

So I am not bothered that no one mentioned Smith thought it was Gerry.

I am aware from c4 news that these e fits have been in Private Investigator files for 5 years and not where they should have been, with police.

by tasprin 14.10.13 21:54

What was the revelation? Was it that they've been living off a fake sighting for the past six years?
Bundleman was a fantasy then. What was that special technique used by 'forensic artist' Melissa Little to improve Jane Tanner's memory? Imagination?

by Roly Poly 14.10.13 21:54

Well just texted the programme

Like the Smith family I am 80% certain that the efit is Gerry McCann, also what about the dogs and the David Payne visit

by whmon 14.10.13 21:54

Several things stuck out for me in the programme but I only want to mention the actors in the reconstruction here and I don't know whether they were chosen to portray the pro or the anti McCann version of events.

First of all I immediately noticed that the actors chosen to play the Mccanns were much more physically attractive than the Mccanns themselves. I remember reading some psychology article about attractiveness and how people are perceived to have 'nicer' personalities if they are attractive.

However, the man in the reconstruction of the Smith sighting either was the same actor chosen to play GM, or it was another actor chosen to resemble the actor who portrayed GM!

by Wahrheit 14.10.13 21:54

russiandoll wrote:
ShuBob wrote:
russiandoll wrote:
Wahrheit wrote:"SY have done a great job": Gerry
I think maybe they have. It aint over til the fat lady sings.

Did Redwood diss the PJ?

There is A LOT imo going on behind the scenes.
Thanks russiandoll for still being optimistic as I am. It's not easy being optimistic in the circumstances.
I did not expect Redwood or the reconstruction to go into the timeline details in 25 minutes. The reconstruction did not last long at all, it was interspersed with interview clips.

So I am not bothered that no one mentioned Smith thought it was Gerry.

I am aware from c4 news that these e fits have been in Private Investigator files for 5 years and not where they should have been, with police.

Don't you think it might have been useful to mention what the man was wearing at least? Buttons on the pants might have jogged someone's memory.

by GlamGran 14.10.13 21:54

In the first scenes of the 'reconstruction' they showed the McCanns with a pushchair but they themselves said they didn't take one??!

by MoonGoddess 14.10.13 21:55

MRNOODLES wrote:
MoonGoddess wrote:I got a bit lost in my anger....... so what time is the supposed disappearance meant to have taken place?
Chico Time

Cheers..... that lifted my spirits!!

by listener 14.10.13 21:55

russiandoll wrote: It was a mediocre drama- documentary. I noted what was not said.

Me too

by Nina 14.10.13 21:55

So, the first hapoy familt shots of the parents and a skipping madeleine and twins in a buggy, oh so the we didn't have a buggy is a lie eh?. And back to the shutters up and window open, and the whooshing curtains. I am so angry after watching this sycophantic waste of air space. Sad to say though, I think any will be taken in by it.

by **PeterMac** 14.10.13 21:56

TANNER WRONG - SMITH RIGHT
TANNER WRONG - SMITH RIGHT
TANNER WRONG - SMITH RIGHT
TANNER WRONG - SMITH RIGHT
TANNER WRONG - SMITH RIGHT

Is that it ?

Is there nothing else ?
Point of entry
Point of exit
Time window
Sedation
Method,
means
motive,
Modos Operandi.
Who,
Where,
When
Why,

by MoonGoddess 14.10.13 21:57

whmon wrote:Several things stuck out for me in the programme but I only want to mention the actors in the reconstruction here and I don't know whether they were chosen to portray the pro or the anti McCann version of events.

First of all I immediately noticed that the actors chosen to play the Mccanns were much more physically attractive than the Mccanns themselves. I remember reading some psychology article about attractiveness and how people are perceived to have 'nicer' personalities if they are attractive.

However, the man in the reconstruction of the Smith sighting either was the same actor chosen to play GM, or it was another actor chosen to resemble the actor who portrayed GM!

I noticed that...

by MRNOODLES 14.10.13 21:57

MoonGoddess wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:
MoonGoddess wrote:I got a bit lost in my anger....... so what time is the supposed disappearance meant to have taken place?
Chico Time
Cheers..... that lifted my spirits!!

Soz I wasn't being sarcy. I was a little confused over the exact time too.

by Newintown 14.10.13 21:57

russiandoll wrote:
ShuBob wrote:
russiandoll wrote:
Wahrheit wrote:"SY have done a great job": Gerry
I think maybe they have. It aint over til the fat lady sings.

Did Redwood diss the PJ?

There is A LOT imo going on behind the scenes.
Thanks russiandoll for still being optimistic as I am. It's not easy being optimistic in the circumstances.
I did not expect Redwood or the reconstruction to go into the timeline details in 25 minutes. The reconstruction did not last long at all, it was interspersed with interview clips.

So I am not bothered that no one mentioned Smith thought it was Gerry.

I am aware from c4 news that these e fits have been in Private Investigator files for 5 years and not where they should have been, with police.

The sighting by Martin Smith wasn't in the PI files for 5 years as Amaral mentioned it and sent the Irish Police to interview him about the sighting. He must have done an e-fit very early on I would imagine.

by tiredofthebs 14.10.13 21:57

bunglebonce wrote:Nothing about this sits right with me, so many options to think about - so much missed out!!!

I have been viewing various twitters and boards during this broadcast, all saying much the same - Whitewash!

Are people being set up to fall on their own sword??

Watching the McCann's, I see the usual prepared and learnt act, as each one speaks, the other keeps a steady side gaze - very intense - the downward looking, turn and closure of eyes when they speak, they are so bloody dodgy!! I have worked with the police, there is no way they can be dismissing these two as non-suspects!

As a side, Thank you to all you hard workers and knowledge keepers on here that have kept me informed of facts and creating a sensible easy to follow board!!

The bit in bold is the only thing that gives me hope.

That DCI Redwood is a very experienced copper. He won't be taken in by this evil pair in the way that Lorraine Kelly and Kirsty Young are. He knows there was no abduction. If he doesn't then he is in the wrong job.

by **Tony Bennett** 14.10.13 21:59

PeterMac wrote:TANNER WRONG - SMITH RIGHT
TANNER WRONG - SMITH RIGHT
TANNER WRONG - SMITH RIGHT
TANNER WRONG - SMITH RIGHT
TANNER WRONG - SMITH RIGHT

Is that it ?

Is there nothing else ?

Quite a few blond, brown and dark-haired men here, there and everywhere between 3pm and 10pm, with lots of blurry and fuzzy e-fits of them - and a fourfold increase in burglaries.

Enough to keep Scotland Yard in progress for another £6 million...

by MoonGoddess 14.10.13 21:59

MRNOODLES wrote:
MoonGoddess wrote:
MRNOODLES wrote:
MoonGoddess wrote:I got a bit lost in my anger....... so what time is the supposed disappearance meant to have taken place?
Chico Time
Cheers..... that lifted my spirits!!
Soz I wasn't being sarcy. I was a little confused over the exact time too.

No I know you wasn't, you genuinely made me laugh... which was a rare moment after that fricking B*** S***

by onthecase 14.10.13 22:00

what a load of tosh!! seriously , was that supposed to be a reconstrustion ??? and who is this holiday maker taking his daughter home from the 'night creche ' did he not see the news and think to himself ' oh that could have been me ' ! utter rubbish no mention of the dogs,
e fit is gerry by the way : yes