The missing blanket

candyfloss wrote:Most of the articles that mention a blanket are around ~September 2007, so where did this info come from, when clearly in her statement to PJ on 4th May 2007 she says no blanket - and why say without a blanket, why not just a description of what you saw. You wouldn't add what you didn't see.

Jane Tanner's statement to PJ 4th May
The suspicious man.

However, she spotted a man who was going along at a fair speed with a child in his arms with the child in pyjamas without a blanket, which attracted her attention. The interviewee only saw the man from the side with the child in his arms. She noticed this person exactly at the moment when she walked past Gerald and Jez. That person was coming out of the path at the end of the apartment block (1) where they are staying. The man quickly crossed the intersection. The entrance to the building where the apartments are is the exact place where she saw the man. After checking on her children, the interviewee went back to the "tapas." On her way back, Gerald McCann was no longer in the road where she had seen him talking. On her arrival at the restaurant (3) Gerald McCann was with his wife Kate Healy.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This really is a very interesting thread. But to answer your very perceptive question Candyfloss, why add what you didn't see?

Well we know for a fact that it would not have been unusual to see an adult carrying a child wrapped in a blanket at that time of night, parents would be carrying their children home from the communal evening babysitting facility and I believe blankets were provided for that purpose, particularly on cold nights as that one apparently was.

So, if some smart arse comes along and points this fact out, the clear declaration that there was no blanket separates this sighting from a homeward bound parent.

Can't have been a parent, didn't have a blanket ergo must have been the abductor. Right...???

So from the limited facts we have we can say or infer the following.....

On 3 May 2007 Maddie is gone.

On 4 May 2007 JT makes a statement to PJ stating she saw a man carrying a child away and he DID NOt have a blanket, this simple statement of something that wasn’t there distinguishing our potential abductor from a homeward bound parent.

At the same time 5A is photographed by the PJ and Maddies pink blanket is photographed in situ as is a large holdall. So our potential abductor definitely did not take them.

At the end of May the McCanns hire the Renault Scenic.

In August Eddie and Keela do their stuff and alert to the scent of human cadaver in the boot of the Renault Scenic amongst other places.

Sometime between the 4th May and when they hotfooted it back to England, at the beginning of Sept, the PJ ask them to produce the blanket which was in existence after M’s disappearance and which it appears for some reason they were unable to produce. We don't know exactly when this was but it would seem logical that it would have been around the same time they asked about the holdall and this would most likely have been after the searches by Eddie and Keela.

I think it is highly unlikely that upon raising this issue they would have told them they had the blanket in photographs, they would have held this back, probably just said they remembered it being there. So at this point Team McC are likely unaware the blanket is photographed. They probably don’t become aware of this until much later when the files are released.

At the begining of september 2007, the McCannsreturn to England and shortly after that articles appear in newspapers suddenly describing JTs bundleman who magically is now carrying a child wrapped in a blanket.

In 2009 Amaral says that he will attempt to get the case reopened on the strength of this missing blanket and drops a strong hint that similar fibres were found in the back of the Renault Scenic where the cadaver dog did what it was highly trained to do and alerted to the scent of the presence of human death.

Hmm.....

Does anyone know if JT's story changed when she was interviewed by Leicester constabulary? Does she mention bundleman with a blanket in that one? Was it first floated in the press and then adopted by her?

Interesting also that Bridget O'Donell says JeZ Wilkins carried their child wrapped in a blanket the night before.........

My phone rang as our food arrived; our baby had woken up. I walked the round trip to collect him from the kiddie club, then back to the restaurant. He kept crying and eventually we left our meal unfinished and walked back again to the club to fetch our sleeping daughter. Jes carried her home in a blanket. The next night we stayed in. It was Thursday, May 3.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Does anyone remember this:



FABRICATED: Bag found in PORTUGAL

".......Saturday November 16th Maddie DNA clue in airport bag Traces found on fleece and stained jeans By Dominic Herbert, 03/11/2007 A BAG of clothes containing DNA linked to Madeleine McCann has been found dumped by a road in Portugal. The white carrier bag was discovered in a layby two weeks ago near Faro airport, the News of the World can reveal. Maddie's parents Kate and Gerry McCann have learned the bag contained a blue fleece jacket and a pair of adult jeans with traces of DNA that contained "moderate" links to the missing four-year-old. There was also a SHOWER CURTAIN inside...........

....."Miss Tanner has given a key account of seeing a man carrying a child away from the McCanns' apartment. Both her and Dr O'Brian deny that they have contacted police to change their statements........ Once again JANE TANNER and WHY it is so important to her that you know she did not have JEANS with her when MADELEINE disappeared. She is not asked what clothing she wore on that night, but volunteers the information. And goes on to explain she was wearing one of RUSSELS fleeces. QUOTE I remember I was wearing, because it was cold, I’d got Russell’s big, I’d borrowed one of his, erm, fleeces, so I’d got a big sort of fleece, it probably came down to about here, but then I’d got flip-flops on and cropped trousers, because I’d only got, I didn’t take jeans, I know I didn’t take jeans on holiday, and then. The fabricated article of the bag found along the road to FARO airport and its list of contents are of no importance...just the two items are relevant above the reporter Dominic Herberts name. MADDIE DNA: TRACES FOUND ON FLEECE AND STAINED JEANS...........

Staying with the blanket....

Clearly GA does not think M is alive. I think it is prety obvious from what GA has said that he strongly suspects that if he finds M he will find the blanket or vice versa. Now we know that initially bundleman DID NOT have a blanket JT was very clear on this for some reason. The press, in Sept seem to have gotten hold of the new idea that bundleman did have a blanket the timing of which raises questions.

Now if sometime later, when interviewed in this country, JT's story has changed and she describes bundleman with a blanket, she is putting M and the blanket together so confirming GA's suspiscions. A confirmation right? Remember, at this point there is a very good chance they were NOT aware the blanket had been photographed and hence what the PJ thought they saw would have been much easier to explain away than hard evidential fact.

From the rogatory interview McCannfiles.com
Jane Tanner:
And the thing that really struck me was the, erm, the bare feet. And the thought that came into my head was, I’ll say when we’re in Leicester, our children were quite adaptable, and what we used to do is, we used to walk round to Dave and Fi’s house for, erm, the kids, for tea with the kids, the kids would play, we’d put them in a travel cot there and we’d sometimes stay a bit later and then carry the kids home, because it’s only, it’s like the next road. And we’d wrap them in a blanket or whatever, but you could always, their feet would fall, their feet would fall out the bottom and you’d think ‘Oh they’re going to get cold feet’ because they’d always wriggle. So one thing I thought was ‘Oh a bit of a bad parent like us, you know, that kid’s obviously being taken home’ or whatever. And I think that’s all, you know, that’s sort of, erm, I think that’s where the sort of I thought ‘Oh’, and that was the only reason I really clocked it I think. Because at that point I thought it’s a person taking their child either back from the crèche or, you know, just some father carrying their own child, so it didn’t really, you know, and that didn’t. I’m making it sound like it really registered at the time, but it didn’t, that is literally, I thought ‘Oh’”.
Unquote

By now it's april 2008, the Rothley meeting in November must have clarified a few things and possibly by now the blanket question has been addressed. The blanket is now not only related to how parents took their children from the creche at night, we are now going way back into the past in the UK giving a second reason as to why the lack of a blanket bothered her so much.

When I was a toddler, I had a tricycle and my mother told me not to go round the corner, if I did the birds would tell her if I did. Of course I did go round the corner. When I came back I asked her if the birds had told her anything..

justme3 wrote:Does anyone remember this:



FABRICATED: Bag found in PORTUGAL

".......Saturday November 16th Maddie DNA clue in airport bag Traces found on fleece and stained jeans By Dominic Herbert, 03/11/2007 A BAG of clothes containing DNA linked to Madeleine McCann has been found dumped by a road in Portugal. The white carrier bag was discovered in a layby two weeks ago near Faro airport, the News of the World can reveal. Maddie's parents Kate and Gerry McCann have learned the bag contained a blue fleece jacket and a pair of adult jeans with traces of DNA that contained "moderate" links to the missing four-year-old. There was also a SHOWER CURTAIN inside...........

....."Miss Tanner has given a key account of seeing a man carrying a child away from the McCanns' apartment. Both her and Dr O'Brian deny that they have contacted police to change their statements........ Once again JANE TANNER and WHY it is so important to her that you know she did not have JEANS with her when MADELEINE disappeared. She is not asked what clothing she wore on that night, but volunteers the information. And goes on to explain she was wearing one of RUSSELS fleeces. QUOTE I remember I was wearing, because it was cold, I’d got Russell’s big, I’d borrowed one of his, erm, fleeces, so I’d got a big sort of fleece, it probably came down to about here, but then I’d got flip-flops on and cropped trousers, because I’d only got, I didn’t take jeans, I know I didn’t take jeans on holiday, and then. The fabricated article of the bag found along the road to FARO airport and its list of contents are of no importance...just the two items are relevant above the reporter Dominic Herberts name. MADDIE DNA: TRACES FOUND ON FLEECE AND STAINED JEANS...........

In the 2007 Panorama JT said she was wearing a big jumper. She also said that she thought bundleman was a bad parent as the child's feet were uncovered, as she went to check on the child left alone. Oh, the irony!



JANE: Well I could see.. I could tell it was a child, and I could see the feet and... feet and the bottom of the pyjamas, and I just thought that child's not got any shoes on because you could see the feet, and it was quite a cold night in Portugal in May it's not actually that warm, and I'd got a big jumper on, and I can remember thinking oh that parent is not a particularly good parent, they've not wrapped them up

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

tigger wrote:From the rogatory interview McCannfiles.com
Jane Tanner:
And the thing that really struck me was the, erm, the bare feet. And the thought that came into my head was, I’ll say when we’re in Leicester, our children were quite adaptable, and what we used to do is, we used to walk round to Dave and Fi’s house for, erm, the kids, for tea with the kids, the kids would play, we’d put them in a travel cot there and we’d sometimes stay a bit later and then carry the kids home, because it’s only, it’s like the next road. And we’d wrap them in a blanket or whatever, but you could always, their feet would fall, their feet would fall out the bottom and you’d think ‘Oh they’re going to get cold feet’ because they’d always wriggle. So one thing I thought was ‘Oh a bit of a bad parent like us, you know, that kid’s obviously being taken home’ or whatever. And I think that’s all, you know, that’s sort of, erm, I think that’s where the sort of I thought ‘Oh’, and that was the only reason I really clocked it I think. Because at that point I thought it’s a person taking their child either back from the crèche or, you know, just some father carrying their own child, so it didn’t really, you know, and that didn’t. I’m making it sound like it really registered at the time, but it didn’t, that is literally, I thought ‘Oh’”.
Unquote

By now it's april 2008, the Rothley meeting in November must have clarified a few things and possibly by now the blanket question has been addressed. The blanket is now not only related to how parents took their children from the creche at night, we are now going way back into the past in the UK giving a second reason as to why the lack of a blanket bothered her so much.

When I was a toddler, I had a tricycle and my mother told me not to go round the corner, if I did the birds would tell her if I did. Of course I did go round the corner. When I came back I asked her if the birds had told her anything..

Thanks for that Tigger...

She doesn't actually say she was in a blanket but she links the sight of bare feet to feet falling out the bottom of a blanket. I think GA's suspicions are spot on.

Of course if M an dthe blanket were ever found together there would be some banal explanation - "oh you meant that blanket" - but would anyone believe it?

What actually happened to it? Ever found?

Was just Reading This
If a child’s body is found, there’s a very good chance we’ll figure out who did it. Parents aren’t usually as detached about disposing of their children’s bodies as strangers are – they may wrap the body in plastic and bury it someplace significant to them. If they feel remorse over the murder, they may try to lead investigators in the right direction so the body wil be found and buried in a proper ceremony.
Journey Into Darkness, John Douglas, page 148

"The child was found buried in the woods in his snowsuit, wrapped in a blanket, then completely covered with a thick plastic bag. A kidnapper or child molester would not have taken this much care to make him warm and "comfortable," or to try to shelter the body from the elements. While many murder scenes show obvious and prolonged rage, and dump sites often show contempt and hostility, the hallmarks of this burial were love and guilt."
Mindhunter, John Douglas, page 287

Eventually the mother confirmed the profilers’ estimate of what had happened, and admitted to having killed her own child and trying to cover up the crime with a mock kidnapping. She took the police to the site where the body had been left. Here there was no evidence of staging at all, with the little girl buried deep in secluded woodland, wrapped in thick warm garments and a blanket, and covered with a bag to deter predators. Had the body been found for any other reason, the care taken over the disposal of the child’s remains would have tended to focus attention on the mother, for the combination of love and guilt shown so clearly, rather than the indifference to be expected from real kidnappers.
Profiling, the psychology of catching killers, David Owen, page 89

So - i wondering where the blanket is. Some place significant to gm and km is imo the Church. And im sure she is wrapped in her Pink blanket and burried imo

and she is probably holding what was really her favourite cuddly toy, because imo it was not the pink cat.

Just dont get it. What are the parents explanation? Its just gone? They lost it? Cant find any of that. The blanket would be hard evidence. And it just sort of dissapeared?

Bumping this up because in another thread here there's a question on the pink blanket.

I've seen an interview with Gonçalo Amaral where he states that the pink blanket is central to the case. Iirc he said something that if and when the blanket is found the case will be solved.

It was in the first photographs taken in 5a. As was the tennis bag.
It was gone in the second set of photographs taken in 5a - I believe only hours later. As was the tennis bag.
The tennis bag was either stolen, had never been there at all or in fact had never existed, according to various explanations from TM.

We hear little about the blanket per se. A pink blanket was given to the first dog handlers, who arrived around 2.00 am on the 4th.
The next set of handlers were not given Maddie's clothes or a blanket but a towel said to have been used by her.

Together with cuddlecat, the pink 'Princess' blanket was absolute proof of abduction. Both vital proof as far as TM is concerned.

It's always been my belief that JT described something she had seen or done (in view of the 'I carried' in the one interview recently discussed).
The way the abductor was said to have carried the child is the way one would carry a dead body, not a live one and it would be likely that a dead body would be wrapped.

tigger wrote:Bumping this up because in another thread here there's a question on the pink blanket.

I've seen an interview with Gonçalo Amaral where he states that the pink blanket is central to the case. Iirc he said something that if and when the blanket is found the case will be solved.

It was in the first photographs taken in 5a. As was the tennis bag.
It was gone in the second set of photographs taken in 5a - I believe only hours later. As was the tennis bag.
The tennis bag was either stolen, had never been there at all or in fact had never existed, according to various explanations from TM.

We hear little about the blanket per se. A pink blanket was given to the first dog handlers, who arrived around 2.00 am on the 4th.
The next set of handlers were not given Maddie's clothes or a blanket but a towel said to have been used by her.

Together with cuddlecat, the pink 'Princess' blanket was absolute proof of abduction. Both vital proof as far as TM is concerned.

It's always been my belief that JT described something she had seen or done (in view of the 'I carried' in the one interview recently discussed).
The way the abductor was said to have carried the child is the way one would carry a dead body, not a live one and it would be likely that a dead body would be wrapped.

Kate mentioned a blanket in one of her tv appearances, iirc. She said something about hoping she had her blanket - perhaps the Oprah or Irish interview. It struck me at the time that the way she phrased it, was more reference to a particular blanket, rather than suggesting she was hoping that Madeleine was warm with a blanket.

It's on page one of this topic. The whole topic is worth a read.

Something I didn't notice before, why does Kate bring a different blanket to Madeleine's birthday service?



[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Finn wrote:Something I didn't notice before, why does Kate bring a different blanket to Madeleine's birthday service?



[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Ghosh! A white blanket, certainly not a 'pink Princess blanket' who is she trying to fool? The 'shutters - cuddlecat - blanket' was the order of the day in the press. Perhaps she was helping it along? Not the same blanket however.

It makes the whole thing look even more staged than ever. Makes me wonder which blanket she gave to the dog handler.

Madeleine was almost 4, well past the need for multiple baby blankets.

And here was me thinking that she had taken a shawl or cardie to cover her bare arms and chest in church, her being a good Christian woman.

It looks like a cardigan to me. Practical thinking. Churches tend not to be heated and the weather early May tends to cool off quickly at the end of the day.

NB tended to cool off in earlier years. Nowadays they start cool and stay cool for the rest of the day ...

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Last night Kate arrived for Mass clutching a blanket from her missing daughter's bed. She was wearing shorts and a yellow top and held Maddie's Cuddle Cat tightly as she held her husband's hand. Green and yellow ribbons have been tied to the church doors - green the Portuguese symbol of hope and yellow in remembrance of missing Maddie.

A shawl/cardigan makes a lot of sense so if I've made a misleading statement I apologize. But here is where the information came from.

"Last night Kate arrived for Mass clutching a blanket from her missing daughter's bed."

You're completely forgiven inasmuch as I'm concerned, Finn. I'm thinking completely different about the sloppy, tear-jerking journalist [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Finn wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Last night Kate arrived for Mass clutching a blanket from her missing daughter's bed. She was wearing shorts and a yellow top and held Maddie's Cuddle Cat tightly as she held her husband's hand. Green and yellow ribbons have been tied to the church doors - green the Portuguese symbol of hope and yellow in remembrance of missing Maddie.

A shawl/cardigan makes a lot of sense so if I've made a misleading statement I apologize. But here is where the information came from.

Wearing shorts and a short-sleeved top - the item in her hand is clearly a fleece of some sort, the thick -rolled hem makes it a blanket. Yes, she was ticking all the boxes except suitable and respectful dress for church.

I agree, from the many photos seeing them enter and leaving churches, they don't have a "roman catholic" sense of dressing ...

Châtelaine wrote:I agree, from the many photos seeing them enter and leaving churches, they don't have a "roman catholic" sense of dressing ...

Yes they didn't dressed properly for church, but PDL is a tourist place so no one would bother with that and especially in the first days when every popular there wanted to comfort them and give them any support they could. I read in another topic something about the dress code to meetings with the Pope, that was most shocking as Kate didn't even covered her hair.
As to the missing blanket, it's as missing as the sports bag, come on Mcs we have the blanket on the first PJ pictures,but maybe the PJ /GNR were so sloppy that that first night the "abductor " came back, got into the apartment while the officers were munching on sardines and smoking and took the blanket and the bag ...

It is very well possible that the PJ allowed the blanket and the bag to be taken, on purpose. Just to identify leads and to incriminate the perpetrators, to check if it was an abduction or not.

I still hope that pink fibres were found in the boot of the car. police don't tell everything when a case is not yet solved.

marconi wrote:I still hope that pink fibres were found in the boot of the car. police don't tell everything when a case is not yet solved.

But there is an explanation for everything the police found, or did not find.

Part of the standard evidence planting kit issued on pass out from Training School includes human blood (or use your own if you choose to), a small rotting sea bass, and bunches of fibres of different colours and types, depending what the suspects say in their statements - (so difficult when suspects change their minds)
A small vial of human cadaverine is also included in the Detective Training kit, but is not issued to Uniform officers.
More Senior Officers are issued with explosive and firearms residues in handy "use once and throw away" sachets. The previous glass phials were found to be unreliable.
And a handwritten but unsigned all-purpose confession is carried at all times by all officers, in case of emergency.

What really interests me is that she is holding a blanket, which we shall call Blanket nr. 2 (white not pink).
The pink blanket aka Blanket nr. 1 was:
one of two things (cuddlecat being the other) by which Kate knew immediately that Maddie had been abducted
the item given only once to the dogs to sniff (the ones who arrived around 1/2 am on the fourth) these dogs did crowd control so not so good at sniffing?
the item which - unlike cuddlecat - disappeared from view between the first and second set of photographs taken by the PJ
the blanket nr.1 should clearly be as cherished by Kate as Cuddlecat and indeed it was already famed as one of the two props from which it was impossible to separate Maddie.

Failing Blanket nr. 1 being available on the 12th, we see possibly only once another blanket - this time white - being clutched by Kate. So how many favourite blankets did Maddie have?
Perhaps the white one was dropped from the props as it was too obviously not the famed Pink Princess Blanket? People might wonder where it was?
Blanket nr. 2 also looks brand-new to me, rather like Cuddlecat, who must have been washed dozens of times if she was given it as a baby, yet looked brand-new still four years later.

Why was the pink blanket, which must have been replete with Maddie's scent as she slept clutching it each night, not given to the proper tracking dogs the following day?
Where indeed is the pink blanket.

Just to add: I was sure I'd read somewhere that the very first vision of JT included a blanket and here it is.


A friend of Madeleine's parents saw girl being carried away Timesonline[/size]

David Brown in Praia da Luz May 27, 2007

A family friend of Gerry and Kate McCann has told police she saw a blonde-haired girl being carried away from an Algarve holiday apartment wrapped in a blanket at the time Madeleine is believed to have been snatched from her room.

The key witness, who is wracked with guilt, was on her way to dinner with Gerry and Kate McCann when she saw the man close to the open window of the bedroom where four-year-old Madeleine had been sleeping. The girl he was carrying was wearing pink pyjamas, the same as Madeleine's.
unquote

Initially I think JT saw a 'bundle' man? Thought to be a child in a blanket? Then later it was a child very much without a blanket.

Now JT has form in mentioning things that are not there, she didn't have jeans and she didn't have a fleece and later on I believe the child didn't have a blanket. Certainly by the time of the rogatory she definitely didn't have a blanket.

tigger wrote:Just to add: I was sure I'd read somewhere that the very first vision of JT included a blanket and here it is.


A friend of Madeleine's parents saw girl being carried away Timesonline[/size]

David Brown in Praia da Luz May 27, 2007

A family friend of Gerry and Kate McCann has told police she saw a blonde-haired girl being carried away from an Algarve holiday apartment wrapped in a blanket at the time Madeleine is believed to have been snatched from her room.

The key witness, who is wracked with guilt, was on her way to dinner with Gerry and Kate McCann when she saw the man close to the open window of the bedroom where four-year-old Madeleine had been sleeping. The girl he was carrying was wearing pink pyjamas, the same as Madeleine's.
unquote

Initially I think JT saw a 'bundle' man? Thought to be a child in a blanket? Then later it was a child very much without a blanket.

Now JT has form in mentioning things that are not there, she didn't have jeans and she didn't have a fleece and later on I believe the child didn't have a blanket. Certainly by the time of the rogatory she definitely didn't have a blanket. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

So glad you found this tigger. I was sure the original had been an unidentifiable, pair of feet/legs 'wrapped' in a blanket vision. Then it later became more identifiable as a pair of pyjamas with feet, then the pinkish, frilly, flowery effect pyjama bottoms, so visible in the darkness although the guy's face wasn't. It's so good to be going back over old territory, with so much of the jigsaw now put in place, and so many versions having 'metamorphosed' since the originals. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]