The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Team McCann :: Fake Sightings of Maddie's Faked Abduction
Page 8 of 11 • Share
Page 8 of 11 • 1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
Oh well, dumbass me, let's all just FORGET about the 'lying' by the McCanns or Wilkins saying where they actually were at the EXACT time the McCanns daughter was being 'abducted'
Bring back Dave 'grabbit' Edgar, i say.
"it dosen't matter where witnesses were, when a child was 'abducted''
Bring back Dave 'grabbit' Edgar, i say.
"it dosen't matter where witnesses were, when a child was 'abducted''
jeanmonroe- Posts : 5818
Activity : 7756
Likes received : 1674
Join date : 2013-02-07
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
jeanmonroe wrote:Oh well, dumbass me, let's all just FORGET about the 'lying' by the McCanns or Wilkins saying where they actually were at the EXACT time the McCanns daughter was being 'abducted'
Bring back Dave 'grabbit' Edgar, i say.
"it dosen't matter where witnesses were, when a child was 'abducted''
Nobody's saying we should forget anything :)
whatliesbehindthesofa- Posts : 1320
Activity : 1327
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2013-11-08
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
At risk of becoming repetitive, why did the McChicken cross the road?
Other than to provide sufficient physical space for JT to become the invisible woman before sighting Crecheman, what reason could GM have had for placing the conversation away from the rear of 5A?
Could it be that GM was attempting to establish that JW couldn't have seen something 'unusual', such as the childgate or patio door being open or the corner of a bag protruding from a flowerbed, as the converation took place away from the rear entrance to 5A?
Other than to provide sufficient physical space for JT to become the invisible woman before sighting Crecheman, what reason could GM have had for placing the conversation away from the rear of 5A?
Could it be that GM was attempting to establish that JW couldn't have seen something 'unusual', such as the childgate or patio door being open or the corner of a bag protruding from a flowerbed, as the converation took place away from the rear entrance to 5A?
ultimaThule- Posts : 3355
Activity : 3376
Likes received : 7
Join date : 2013-09-18
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
ultimaThule wrote:At risk of becoming repetitive, why did the McChicken cross the road?
Other than to provide sufficient physical space for JT to become the invisible woman before sighting Crecheman, what reason could GM have had for placing the conversation away from the rear of 5A?
Could it be that GM was attempting to establish that JW couldn't have seen something 'unusual', such as the childgate or patio door being open or the corner of a bag protruding from a flowerbed, as the converation took place away from the rear entrance to 5A?
The first reason you gave is plenty for me. It simply isn't credible that neither Gerry not Wilkins would not notice Jane Tanner walking right past them. Wilkins didn't see her, so Gerry has no choice but to provide an explanation for that.
And despite all the other crap that Tanner has given the world, I award her a few brownie points for trying to stick to her story during the Mockumentary. Perhaps she'd realised that she'd changed her story far too many times already.
whatliesbehindthesofa- Posts : 1320
Activity : 1327
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2013-11-08
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
ultimaThule Today at 2:01 pm
.At risk of becoming repetitive,
-----------------------------------------------
WHY can't 38 solely dedicated experienced Met Police, 'working' on this case for almost 3 YEARS, see the 'discrepancies and contradictions' in the 'files' and statements given, and all recorded, by the T9?
.At risk of becoming repetitive,
-----------------------------------------------
WHY can't 38 solely dedicated experienced Met Police, 'working' on this case for almost 3 YEARS, see the 'discrepancies and contradictions' in the 'files' and statements given, and all recorded, by the T9?
jeanmonroe- Posts : 5818
Activity : 7756
Likes received : 1674
Join date : 2013-02-07
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
jeanmonroe wrote:
WHY can't 38 solely dedicated experienced Met Police, 'working' on this case for almost 3 YEARS, see the 'discrepancies and contradictions' in the 'files' and statements given, and all recorded, by the T9?
We don't know that they can't.
whatliesbehindthesofa- Posts : 1320
Activity : 1327
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2013-11-08
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
jeanmonroe wrote:Oh well, dumbass me, let's all just FORGET about the 'lying' by the McCanns or Wilkins saying where they actually were at the EXACT time the McCanns daughter was being 'abducted'
Bring back Dave 'grabbit' Edgar, i say.
"it dosen't matter where witnesses were, when a child was 'abducted''
It was good you highlighted that - can`t be said enough as far as I`m concerned. I was just concentrating on JW seeing JT when she was supposedly standing somewhere dressed in purple - exactly where we don`t know.
Woofer- Posts : 3390
Activity : 3508
Likes received : 14
Join date : 2012-02-06
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
jeanmonroe wrote:ultimaThule Today at 2:01 pm
.At risk of becoming repetitive,
-----------------------------------------------
WHY can't 38 solely dedicated experienced Met Police, 'working' on this case for almost 3 YEARS, see the 'discrepancies and contradictions' in the 'files' and statements given, and all recorded, by the T9?
IMO it is the discrepancies, and the enormous volume of them, in the accounts given by the McCanns and the Tapas 7 which led to the inception of Operation Grange and the fact that it has moved from its original remit of 'investigative revew' to a proactive 'investigation' indicates that 38 Metropolitan Police personnel have noted every single one of the 'discrepancies and contradictions' in the files held by the PJ and Leicestershire Police and have discovered others we are, as yet, unaware of but which will collectively form the basis for the prosecution of those who have committed heinous crimes against a 3 year old child.
My question 'why did the McChicken cross the road?' relates to my attempt to stand everything the McLiars and their pals have said on its head to see if it presents a more balanced picture upside down than it does on first impression. This is akin to daubing a Monet over a Mondrian but I shall persevere in the hope that more will be revealed than is immediately apparent in the work created by G McCann age 13 and three quarters.
ultimaThule- Posts : 3355
Activity : 3376
Likes received : 7
Join date : 2013-09-18
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
One thing that I cannot think of any explanation for is why GM would insist that he met with Jez Wilkins at 9.15 pm, why could it not be any earlier?
____________________
suzyjohnson- Posts : 1209
Activity : 1542
Likes received : 271
Join date : 2013-03-03
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
suzyjohnson wrote:One thing that I cannot think of any explanation for is why GM would insist that he met with Jez Wilkins at 9.15 pm, why could it not be any earlier?
Because he had no watch with him; thats why
Guest- Guest
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
Portia, that doesn't help.
Why would it be so important that GM met JW later rather than earlier?
Why would it be so important that GM met JW later rather than earlier?
____________________
suzyjohnson- Posts : 1209
Activity : 1542
Likes received : 271
Join date : 2013-03-03
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
suzyjohnson wrote:Portia, that doesn't help.
Why would it be so important that GM met JW later rather than earlier?
Later: he would appear to have been checking and to be on his way back;
Sooner: he would seem to be on his way to go and check
I forget: what did he say to Jezz: I checked? Or: I am on my way there?
Two different options, relevant to the presumed timeline(s)
Guest- Guest
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
Portia wrote:
Later: he would appear to have been checking and to be on his way back;
Sooner: he would seem to be on his way to go and check
I forget: what did he say to Jezz: I checked? Or: I am on my way there?
Two different options, relevant to the presumed timeline(s)
There is another option - that Wilkins was mistaken and Gerry was correct - but I don't give it much credence :)
IMO he was on his way to check. Wilkins is a little unclear on whether Gerry had come out of the gate or not - in the first police interview he says that he had, and in the rogatory interview he says he didn't know whether he had. From what I can tell from the Tapas bar staff statements, Gerry was gone pretty much until 9:30. So it is entirely possible in my view that Gerry left the Tapas at 9:04 as he claimed, bumped into Wilkins round about 9:05-9:06, and was inside 5A by 9:10, where he stayed until about 9:25, watching TV.
whatliesbehindthesofa- Posts : 1320
Activity : 1327
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2013-11-08
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
Ask yourself this:
Why would Jez Wilkins have reason to lie about where he and gerry were standing when they spoke and when tanner allegedly walked past them and saw 'the abductor' walking across the top of the street?
What motive would wilkins have to say he was standing here and not there?
Now
Why would gerry have reason to lie about where he and Wikins were standing when they spoke and when tanner allegedly walked past them and saw 'the abductor' walking across the top of the street?
Why would tanner have reason to lie about where gerry and Wilkins were standing when she allegedly walked past them and saw 'the abductor' walking across the top of the street?
If they were by the gate as per Wilkins then tanner could not have seen 'the abductor' and both gerry and Wilkins would have seen her as she would have to walk directly round them
If they were on the other side of the street as per gerry then tanner could have seen an unobstructed view of 'the abductor' and walked past them and not round them possibly allowing for her not to be seen ( stop snickering at the back)
Both gerry and tanner have a reason to be deceptive as to who was where, who saw what and when.
Anything they say therefore has to be taken with a pinch of salt and questioned further.
Wilkins has no reason to be deceptive since he was not part of the tapas group and thus classed as an independant witness.
Why would Jez Wilkins have reason to lie about where he and gerry were standing when they spoke and when tanner allegedly walked past them and saw 'the abductor' walking across the top of the street?
What motive would wilkins have to say he was standing here and not there?
Now
Why would gerry have reason to lie about where he and Wikins were standing when they spoke and when tanner allegedly walked past them and saw 'the abductor' walking across the top of the street?
Why would tanner have reason to lie about where gerry and Wilkins were standing when she allegedly walked past them and saw 'the abductor' walking across the top of the street?
If they were by the gate as per Wilkins then tanner could not have seen 'the abductor' and both gerry and Wilkins would have seen her as she would have to walk directly round them
If they were on the other side of the street as per gerry then tanner could have seen an unobstructed view of 'the abductor' and walked past them and not round them possibly allowing for her not to be seen ( stop snickering at the back)
Both gerry and tanner have a reason to be deceptive as to who was where, who saw what and when.
Anything they say therefore has to be taken with a pinch of salt and questioned further.
Wilkins has no reason to be deceptive since he was not part of the tapas group and thus classed as an independant witness.
____________________
The little unremembered acts of kindness and love are the best parts of a person's life.
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
ultimaThule wrote:At risk of becoming repetitive, why did the McChicken cross the road?
Other than to provide sufficient physical space for JT to become the invisible woman before sighting Crecheman, what reason could GM have had for placing the conversation away from the rear of 5A?
Could it be that GM was attempting to establish that JW couldn't have seen something 'unusual', such as the childgate or patio door being open or the corner of a bag protruding from a flowerbed, as the converation took place away from the rear entrance to 5A?
Certainly the first and possibly the second reason.
In addition, it also was the way that Tanner found herself thrown to the wolves, a woman with no alibi on that check leaving her to stick to the Tannerman sighting alone (the last person to see Maddie?), and undermining her word and therfore her credibility. I've mentioned it a few times, but it is clear that her tears on the Mockumentary are a result of this betrayal, she is in shock and disbelief. Could this part of the 'story' have been pre-agreed by the 3 of them and the Gerry, in the absence of Wilkins, changed the official line? It was also, of course where football was introduced despite not being in the official timelines.
Either way, can only seem possible that Jane returned for the Mockumentary in good faith and with corroborating stories - it's inconceivable she'd have agreed to it with loose ends untied in her mind. The betrayal occurred during the actual filming.
Guest- Guest
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
Portia wrote:suzyjohnson wrote:Portia, that doesn't help.
Why would it be so important that GM met JW later rather than earlier?
Later: he would appear to have been checking and to be on his way back;
Sooner: he would seem to be on his way to go and check
I forget: what did he say to Jezz: I checked? Or: I am on my way there?
Two different options, relevant to the presumed timeline(s)
And I suppose it would have been difficult for him to say he went round to check on the children at 8.45 pm, when they had only just walked round to the Tapas at 8.30 pm
____________________
suzyjohnson- Posts : 1209
Activity : 1542
Likes received : 271
Join date : 2013-03-03
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
Hobs wrote:Ask yourself this:
Why would Jez Wilkins have reason to lie about where he and gerry were standing when they spoke and when tanner allegedly walked past them and saw 'the abductor' walking across the top of the street?
What motive would wilkins have to say he was standing here and not there?
Now
Why would gerry have reason to lie about where he and Wikins were standing when they spoke and when tanner allegedly walked past them and saw 'the abductor' walking across the top of the street?
Why would tanner have reason to lie about where gerry and Wilkins were standing when she allegedly walked past them and saw 'the abductor' walking across the top of the street?
If they were by the gate as per Wilkins then tanner could not have seen 'the abductor' and both gerry and Wilkins would have seen her as she would have to walk directly round them
If they were on the other side of the street as per gerry then tanner could have seen an unobstructed view of 'the abductor' and walked past them and not round them possibly allowing for her not to be seen ( stop snickering at the back)
Both gerry and tanner have a reason to be deceptive as to who was where, who saw what and when.
Anything they say therefore has to be taken with a pinch of salt and questioned further.
Wilkins has no reason to be deceptive since he was not part of the tapas group and thus classed as an independant witness.
Lovely: game, set & match!
Guest- Guest
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
Dee Coy wrote:ultimaThule wrote:At risk of becoming repetitive, why did the McChicken cross the road?
Other than to provide sufficient physical space for JT to become the invisible woman before sighting Crecheman, what reason could GM have had for placing the conversation away from the rear of 5A?
Could it be that GM was attempting to establish that JW couldn't have seen something 'unusual', such as the childgate or patio door being open or the corner of a bag protruding from a flowerbed, as the converation took place away from the rear entrance to 5A?
Certainly the first and possibly the second reason.
In addition, it also was the way that Tanner found herself thrown to the wolves, a woman with no alibi on that check leaving her to stick to the Tannerman sighting alone (the last person to see Maddie?), and undermining her word and therfore her credibility. I've mentioned it a few times, but it is clear that her tears on the Mockumentary are a result of this betrayal, she is in shock and disbelief. Could this part of the 'story' have been pre-agreed by the 3 of them and the Gerry, in the absence of Wilkins, changed the official line? It was also, of course where football was introduced despite not being in the official timelines.
Either way, can only seem possible that Jane returned for the Mockumentary in good faith and with corroborating stories - it's inconceivable she'd have agreed to it with loose ends untied in her mind. The betrayal occurred during the actual filming.
Makes one wonder what sort of Eejit did the editing and left the Crying Scene intact!
Guest- Guest
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
Portia wrote:
Makes one wonder what sort of Eejit did the editing and left the Crying Scene intact!
--------------------------------------------------------------
Also makes one wonder what sort of Eejit would leave the Gerry McCann with Oldfield 'scene' intact where GM 'ADMITS' that he had NEVER gone into the kids room, on his 'checks' for the whole week, responsible parenting to the fore there then, prior to his 'last' actual 'standing over Madeleine' the night she 'disappeared'.
Perhaps during his prior 'checks' all week, he didn't think how lucky he was to have three wonderful kids, and that's why he never 'checked' inside the kids room until his 'last' check'.
imo, the 'standing over Madeleine, in the recovery position, by GM was all 'staging' so he could say, 'well Madeleine WAS there at 9:04/9:14pm because I 'saw' her'
Did anybody 'else' see Madeleine at that time or do we only have McCann's, the LAST person to see a 'live' Madeleine, 'word' for that?
Rhetorical question!
Anyway, ALL on 'record' directed by the rather 'forgetful' Emma L.
If he, GM, didn't, as he says, go into the kids room to 'check' all week, prior to his 'last' check, how would he know, the 'reason' for the 'quietness' in there was not due to the twins, or Madeleine, lying in there 'de*d' or 'missing'?
And how does MO's listening 'check' at the outside of the shutters, of apartment 5A, at 9:05pm, 3rd May 2007, 'help' when, as above, he didn't 'see' the THREE McCann children, who may well have not been in that room at all, at THAT time, or had been 'abducted or de*d', so he reports back to the McCanns, without actually 'seeing' the three kids IN the apartment, at the tapas 'all QUIET in your apartment'
Well, if the above 'scenario's' had in fact 'happened' to Madeleine or the twins, it would be 'all quiet' wouldn't it?
Makes one wonder what sort of Eejit did the editing and left the Crying Scene intact!
--------------------------------------------------------------
Also makes one wonder what sort of Eejit would leave the Gerry McCann with Oldfield 'scene' intact where GM 'ADMITS' that he had NEVER gone into the kids room, on his 'checks' for the whole week, responsible parenting to the fore there then, prior to his 'last' actual 'standing over Madeleine' the night she 'disappeared'.
Perhaps during his prior 'checks' all week, he didn't think how lucky he was to have three wonderful kids, and that's why he never 'checked' inside the kids room until his 'last' check'.
imo, the 'standing over Madeleine, in the recovery position, by GM was all 'staging' so he could say, 'well Madeleine WAS there at 9:04/9:14pm because I 'saw' her'
Did anybody 'else' see Madeleine at that time or do we only have McCann's, the LAST person to see a 'live' Madeleine, 'word' for that?
Rhetorical question!
Anyway, ALL on 'record' directed by the rather 'forgetful' Emma L.
If he, GM, didn't, as he says, go into the kids room to 'check' all week, prior to his 'last' check, how would he know, the 'reason' for the 'quietness' in there was not due to the twins, or Madeleine, lying in there 'de*d' or 'missing'?
And how does MO's listening 'check' at the outside of the shutters, of apartment 5A, at 9:05pm, 3rd May 2007, 'help' when, as above, he didn't 'see' the THREE McCann children, who may well have not been in that room at all, at THAT time, or had been 'abducted or de*d', so he reports back to the McCanns, without actually 'seeing' the three kids IN the apartment, at the tapas 'all QUIET in your apartment'
Well, if the above 'scenario's' had in fact 'happened' to Madeleine or the twins, it would be 'all quiet' wouldn't it?
jeanmonroe- Posts : 5818
Activity : 7756
Likes received : 1674
Join date : 2013-02-07
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
From what I understand, a sudden change in procedure is a policeman's favorite red flag;
Why, if no checking went on the whole week, did it suddenly spring up on the one and only particular evening in history when a small girl was lost?
Why, if no checking went on the whole week, did it suddenly spring up on the one and only particular evening in history when a small girl was lost?
Guest- Guest
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
Yes indeed, Portia.
Yes indeed, Portia.
____________________
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
Activity : 4058
Likes received : 15
Join date : 2011-09-11
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
Portia, re the crying and why it may have been left in, there was a discussion about this a month ago here:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I believe the crying was left in because it was used in a completely different context. After Gerry pooh-poohs and humiliates Jane and her jaw drops in disbelief and dawning horror and she mumbles "Ok, that's fine", the scene is cut after they patronizingly explain to her it doesn't matter that she's mistaken and we know they are going with Gerry's unquestioned version. Next Jane is shown walking down the street and sees Tannerman. She describes her frustration and helplessness as with hindsight she should have twigged the significance of what she was seeing. We are then shown her crying, ostensibly to back up emotionally how she feels after describing the Tannerman incident. She is shown weeping for pity for Madeleine and her own impotence at not twigging what Tannerman was doing.
But it is quite clear from the lighting and the positions of the people on the set that the weeping took place just after Gerry's discrediting of her memory of where he and Wilkins were positioned. The crying relates to her humiliation and the realisation she's been undermined and is therefore vulnerable.
The film has been cynically edited to use the tears to strengthen the Tannerman myth rather than emphasize the difference between Gerry and Jane's versions and the implications that could have.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Tanner's bit starts about 1min in.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
I believe the crying was left in because it was used in a completely different context. After Gerry pooh-poohs and humiliates Jane and her jaw drops in disbelief and dawning horror and she mumbles "Ok, that's fine", the scene is cut after they patronizingly explain to her it doesn't matter that she's mistaken and we know they are going with Gerry's unquestioned version. Next Jane is shown walking down the street and sees Tannerman. She describes her frustration and helplessness as with hindsight she should have twigged the significance of what she was seeing. We are then shown her crying, ostensibly to back up emotionally how she feels after describing the Tannerman incident. She is shown weeping for pity for Madeleine and her own impotence at not twigging what Tannerman was doing.
But it is quite clear from the lighting and the positions of the people on the set that the weeping took place just after Gerry's discrediting of her memory of where he and Wilkins were positioned. The crying relates to her humiliation and the realisation she's been undermined and is therefore vulnerable.
The film has been cynically edited to use the tears to strengthen the Tannerman myth rather than emphasize the difference between Gerry and Jane's versions and the implications that could have.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
Tanner's bit starts about 1min in.
Guest- Guest
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
What do you say to a chap, who has said, he'll 'check' your THREE kids, then dosen't, and you find one of those kids 'missing' when you 'check' 25 minutes later?
A) "Why the fcuking fcuk didn't you actually check all THREE kids, you fcuking lanky basterd cu*t, like you said you were going to?" You fcuking basterd!" We could have raised the 'alarm' at least 25 minutes 'earlier'
or
B) " Dosen't matter ol' chap. Madeleine's 'missing' now, but not your fault, ol' boy, for you not actually seeing she wasn't in her bed when you said you had 'checked' our three kids, and all was quiet"
or
C) "another drink, Matt? Thanks for 'taking' Kate's 'turn' and checking our THREE kiddies"
A) "Why the fcuking fcuk didn't you actually check all THREE kids, you fcuking lanky basterd cu*t, like you said you were going to?" You fcuking basterd!" We could have raised the 'alarm' at least 25 minutes 'earlier'
or
B) " Dosen't matter ol' chap. Madeleine's 'missing' now, but not your fault, ol' boy, for you not actually seeing she wasn't in her bed when you said you had 'checked' our three kids, and all was quiet"
or
C) "another drink, Matt? Thanks for 'taking' Kate's 'turn' and checking our THREE kiddies"
jeanmonroe- Posts : 5818
Activity : 7756
Likes received : 1674
Join date : 2013-02-07
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
That's my opinion too Jeanmonroe.jeanmonroe wrote:What do you say to a chap, who has said, he'll 'check' your THREE kids, then dosen't, and you find one of those kids 'missing' when you 'check' 25 minutes later?
A) "Why the fcuking fcuk didn't you actually check all THREE kids, like you said you were going to?" We could have raised the 'alarm' 25 minutes 'earlier'
or
B) " Dosen't matter ol' chap. Madeleine's 'missing' now, but not your fault, ol' boy, for you not actually seeing she wasn't in her bed when you said you had 'checked' our three kids, and all was quiet"
or
C) "another drink, Matt? Thanks for 'taking' Kate's 'turn' to check our kiddies"
It's always good to look at who was the 'producer' of this information.
Liz Eagles- Posts : 11153
Activity : 13562
Likes received : 2218
Join date : 2011-09-03
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
jeanmonroe wrote:What do you say to a chap, who has said, he'll 'check' your THREE kids, then dosen't, and you find one of those kids 'missing' when you 'check' 25 minutes later?
A) "Why the fcuking fcuk didn't you actually check all THREE kids, like you said you were going to?" We could have raised the 'alarm' 25 minutes 'earlier'
or
B) " Dosen't matter ol' chap. Madeleine's 'missing' now, but not your fault, ol' boy, for you not actually seeing she wasn't in her bed when you said you had 'checked' our three kids, and all was quiet"
or
C) "another drink, Matt? Thanks for 'taking' Kate's 'turn' and checking our THREE kiddies"
What you ask him is "why the hell did you tell the police the first version of the timeline, we agreed to drop it for the second timeline because it no longer makes sense!"
whatliesbehindthesofa- Posts : 1320
Activity : 1327
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2013-11-08
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
jeanmonroe wrote:What do you say to a chap, who has said, he'll 'check' your THREE kids, then dosen't, and you find one of those kids 'missing' when you 'check' 25 minutes later?
A) "Why the fcuking fcuk didn't you actually check all THREE kids, like you said you were going to?" We could have raised the 'alarm' 25 minutes 'earlier'
or
B) " Dosen't matter ol' chap. Madeleine's 'missing' now, but not your fault, ol' boy, for you not actually seeing she wasn't in her bed when you said you had 'checked' our three kids, and all was quiet"
or
C) "another drink, Matt? Thanks for 'taking' Kate's 'turn' and checking our THREE kiddies"
"B"! Yep, GM effectively says so that on that clip too. He's a real blokes bloke isn't he? One doesn't criticize or undermine one's mates in public.
I'm convinced that programme could be, in addition to the bewk, Exhibit GM 2, m'lud.
Guest- Guest
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
And in any event they have forgiven the "abductor"
But not GA or TB.
But not GA or TB.
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
PeterMac wrote:And in any event they have forgiven the "abductor"
But not GA or TB.
Yes.
I wonder what the courtroom exchange would be IF the 'abductor' was in the witness box?
Abductor: " It's a fair cop, guv, it wuz me wot dun it"
Judge "Would you like to say anything, in response to that, Saint Kate?"
Kate Mccann '"Yes. We have 'forgiven' him for causing all this 'trouble' m'lud"
Judge 'Case dismissed then. And don't ever 'abduct' kiddies in future, Mr Abductor. The next set of parents, whose child you 'abduct' might not be so 'forgivng' as the saintly parents, here today, Kate and Gerry'
Abductor "i won't need to abduct, in the future, m'lud, as i plan to write a couple of 'truthful' bewks and possibly do a film, about what really happened that night in PDL in 2007, and become a celebrity and appear, frequently, if i need more dosh, on Lorraine Kelly's sofa and This Morning'
Judge "Very well then, you are free to go"
Abductor 'Thankyou'
jeanmonroe- Posts : 5818
Activity : 7756
Likes received : 1674
Join date : 2013-02-07
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
The forgiving of the abductor was just a psychological trick to reinforce the idea that there was an abductor - which of course, there wasn't. Keeps you on the front pages too.
whatliesbehindthesofa- Posts : 1320
Activity : 1327
Likes received : 1
Join date : 2013-11-08
Re: The Tanner "Sighting" - AGAIN
IMO it's understandable that the McCanns may struggle with extending their forgiveness to TB who has done so much to highlight their deficiencies as parents but, having forgiven the abductor, it does seem a tad curious that they don't feel able to forgive the man whose only sin was to try to find where they'd put their daughter.
I wonder where AR features on G&K's forgiveness chart? Have they placed a gold or black star by his name, or is there a blank space waiting to be filled before volume 2 of Kate's memoirs hits the shelves?
I wonder where AR features on G&K's forgiveness chart? Have they placed a gold or black star by his name, or is there a blank space waiting to be filled before volume 2 of Kate's memoirs hits the shelves?
ultimaThule- Posts : 3355
Activity : 3376
Likes received : 7
Join date : 2013-09-18
Page 8 of 11 • 1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
Similar topics
» Tanner sighting
» New Series of Videos - MCANN 'LIES' #1 Front Door or Patio Doors
» Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: The Smith Sighting vs Jane Tanner's by Pat Brown
» The only evidence of Madeleine having been abducted came from an alleged sighting of a man with a child, by their friend Jane Tanner.
» As predicted - Latest sighting. 25/4/13....'I saw girl who looked like Maddie on tram in Brussels': New sighting as McCanns' detectives focus on Belgium
» New Series of Videos - MCANN 'LIES' #1 Front Door or Patio Doors
» Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: The Smith Sighting vs Jane Tanner's by Pat Brown
» The only evidence of Madeleine having been abducted came from an alleged sighting of a man with a child, by their friend Jane Tanner.
» As predicted - Latest sighting. 25/4/13....'I saw girl who looked like Maddie on tram in Brussels': New sighting as McCanns' detectives focus on Belgium
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Team McCann :: Fake Sightings of Maddie's Faked Abduction
Page 8 of 11
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum