Innocent British Father

by Guest 15.10.13 16:27

That's nice for Jane, she's off the hook now, for the time being

But:

Who is this guy with the funny peasant-type blouse split at the side;

Is he really a father picking up his child (can we please see the night creche records of May 3rd 2007 to convince us);
Is he really British?
Is he really innocent? How do we know?

When, where, why did he come forward? Police records please to convince us.

Did anyone confirm his story? Records/evidence please.

Why did he keep a childs' pijama's for 6 years after she'd undoubtedly outgrown them?
Why did he keep that funny jacket for the same time?
Why shoes ditto?

Can we be sure we're told the truth, and were're not presented with a MI5 or SY plant/patsy/fake?

How?

by gbwales 15.10.13 16:32

My understanding of the CW bit about him was that the photo they showed of him side-on was with him dressed in clothes similar to those described.
ie: adapting him to fit the existing image. Most people would have looked similar....
I still think it's a weird way to carry his child though!

by deafoldbat 15.10.13 16:38

So what about the Powerpoint presentation produced in 2008 by the McCanns? Where does this fit into new theory?

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

by MRNOODLES 15.10.13 16:43

Portia wrote:That's nice for Jane, she's off the hook now, for the time being

But:

Who is this guy with the funny peasant-type blouse split at the side;

Is he really a father picking up his child (can we please see the night creche records of May 3rd 2007 to convince us);
Is he really British?
Is he really innocent? How do we know?

When, where, why did he come forward? Police records please to convince us.

Did anyone confirm his story? Records/evidence please.

Why did he keep a childs' pijama's for 6 years after she'd undoubtedly outgrown them?
Why did he keep that funny jacket for the same time?
Why shoes ditto?

Can we be sure we're told the truth, and were're not presented with a MI5 or SY plant/patsy/fake?

How?

They made it up, because they knew JT made it up. All in my opinion of course.

by tiny 15.10.13 16:55

MRNOODLES wrote:
Portia wrote:That's nice for Jane, she's off the hook now, for the time being

But:

Who is this guy with the funny peasant-type blouse split at the side;

Is he really a father picking up his child (can we please see the night creche records of May 3rd 2007 to convince us);

Is he really British?

Is he really innocent? How do we know?

When, where, why did he come forward? Police records please to convince us.

Did anyone confirm his story? Records/evidence please.

Why did he keep a childs' pijama's for 6 years after she'd undoubtedly outgrown them?

Why did he keep that funny jacket for the same time?

Why shoes ditto?

Can we be sure we're told the truth, and were're not presented with a MI5 or SY plant/patsy/fake?

How?
They made it up, because they knew JT made it up. All in my opinion of course.

, I don't think jane tanner is of the hook,not by a long chalk,to pervert the course of justice is a serious offence

by ultimaThule 15.10.13 16:58

Should those responsible for Madeleine's disappearance be brought to account in a Court of Law, I suspect we will learn more about the concerned citizen who came forward, albeit 6+ years later, and enabled the British police to revise the all-important timeline and apprehend the perpetrator(s).

Maybe the pyjamas were retained for use by further additions to this man's family, but in matters of serious crime the police are able to source copies of clothing and other items and it could be this is what happened in respect of both the pyjamas and the clothes worn by this father at the time.

by SixMillionQuid 15.10.13 17:01

Just had a thought. The last Crime watch appeal was earlier this year and they did not mention this man carrying his child to the creche. Therefore he must made his appearance to the investigation recently...after six years of maximum publicity

by MRNOODLES 15.10.13 17:02

ultimaThule wrote:Should those responsible for Madeleine's disappearance be brought to account in a Court of Law, I suspect we will learn more about the concerned citizen who came forward, albeit 6+ years later, and enabled the British police to revise the all-important timeline and apprehend the perpetrator(s).

Maybe the pyjamas were retained for use by further additions to this man's family, but in matters of serious crime the police are able to source copies of clothing and other items and it could be this is what happened in respect of both the pyjamas and the clothes worn by this father at the time.

Good job the bloke's hair hadn't altered to much laugh

by ultimaThule 15.10.13 17:08

tiny wrote:, I don't think jane tanner is of the hook,not by a long chalk,to pervert the course of justice is a serious offence

It's not unknown for witnesses to become confused or to be so desirous of aiding the police that they convince themselves they've seen more than they actually did see.

It's also not unknown for material witnesses to serious crimes to be given some consideration by way of pleading to a lesser charge, where applicable, or immunity from prosecution in return for taking the stand.

by ultimaThule 15.10.13 17:10

MRNOODLES wrote:
ultimaThule wrote:Should those responsible for Madeleine's disappearance be brought to account in a Court of Law, I suspect we will learn more about the concerned citizen who came forward, albeit 6+ years later, and enabled the British police to revise the all-important timeline and apprehend the perpetrator(s).

Maybe the pyjamas were retained for use by further additions to this man's family, but in matters of serious crime the police are able to source copies of clothing and other items and it could be this is what happened in respect of both the pyjamas and the clothes worn by this father at the time.
Good job the bloke's hair hadn't altered to much

If he's gone bald in the intervening years, I daresay a wig from the BBC's costume department was commandeered for the faceless photo, Mr Noodles yes

by Seek truth 15.10.13 19:23

This father, who took so long to come forward, (is he going to get away with it?) brought his daughter barefoot in pyjamas from the crèche. So he must have dropped her off in pyjamas at what time? So she played and slept there in her pyjamas with no socks waiting to be picked up.

sarcastic

Was this the only crèche in the area, just wondering what it's called.

by Woofer 15.10.13 19:29

This Creche Man is bugging me as well - mainly because I cannot think of one reason why this man would not have come forward before now.

He must have known a child had been abducted from the complex he was staying at.
He must have known he was in that vicinity at that very time.

Is he deaf, is he simple, is he a hermit, is he blind, does he not have a computer, does he not read a paper, does he not have a television ? There surely cannot be anyone in the world (barring lost Amazonian tribespeople) who have not heard of this case. Perhaps he`s an Inuit and returned to his igloo.

I ain`t buying it.

We`ve all been looking at the Jane Tanner man for 6 years and I bet ALL OF US just assumed that if he was a holiday maker, he would have come forward - BUT HE HADN`T. Unbelievable.

by petunia 15.10.13 19:44

woofer. maybe Jane is has fed up as sy and decided after 6/12 years this has gone on long enough.she has had the pee taken out of her for years maybe she got in touch with Andy and asked for a secret word in his ear.

by Cristobell 15.10.13 20:06

Presumably the PJ have the original creche records. The night babysitters were the same nannies that ran the creche and the kids clubs, this must all be traceable, sleeping babies would be signed in and out.

On that chilly night, we are asked to believe a father collected his child, who was wearing only pyjamas, no slippers, and carried her across his arms in the strange manner described by Jane Tanner. Not only did he fail to provide a blanket for the sleeping child, he also failed to provide any bodily warmth by wrapping his arms around her. As Wendy Murphy would say, I'm not buying it.

by Guest 15.10.13 20:12

Does anyone know where the babysitting place was? Was it at one of the 3 crèches. Surely they would only use one at night as there couldn't have been too many around at that time of year. Everyone said if was very quiet. Bridget O'Donnell and Jez Wilkins used it the night before, when Jez carried his sleeping 3 year old home.

by Daisy 15.10.13 20:16

Cristobell wrote:Presumably the PJ have the original creche records. The night babysitters were the same nannies that ran the creche and the kids clubs, this must all be traceable, sleeping babies would be signed in and out.

On that chilly night, we are asked to believe a father collected his child, who was wearing only pyjamas, no slippers, and carried her across his arms in the strange manner described by Jane Tanner. Not only did he fail to provide a blanket for the sleeping child, he also failed to provide any bodily warmth by wrapping his arms around her. As Wendy Murphy would say, I'm not buying it.

According to Daily Mail article today, he did use a (pink) blanket. There's pictures of it alongside the childs PJ's he kept all this years.

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

by tasprin 15.10.13 20:18

I'm not buying it either. What parent would bring their child out to a crèche wearing neither slippers or shoes - Even Jane Tanner thought he was a bad parent. Conveniently for the Met he's British, but where the heck has he been for the past six years?

by bobbin 15.10.13 20:20

Cristobell wrote:Presumably the PJ have the original creche records. The night babysitters were the same nannies that ran the creche and the kids clubs, this must all be traceable, sleeping babies would be signed in and out.

On that chilly night, we are asked to believe a father collected his child, who was wearing only pyjamas, no slippers, and carried her across his arms in the strange manner described by Jane Tanner. Not only did he fail to provide a blanket for the sleeping child, he also failed to provide any bodily warmth by wrapping his arms around her. As Wendy Murphy would say, I'm not buying it.

But, the outcome is that the public at large now are being informed of the Smith sighting and the police can focus on all the other possibilities of Madeleine's disappearance.
Always locked down by the McCs insistence that Maddie had been abducted because their friend Jane says so, and even getting Gonçalo Amaral moved off the investigation, to have the 'Tanner egg-man' removed from the equation, is really very beneficial.
Whether Jane whispered in someone's ear, whether the police did check creche sheets and find a man who had carried his child sometime that evening (and Jane's timing could be wrong) there are possibilities that the abductor was actually someone legitimate carrying a child, since 11 children had been in the creche that evening.
This is good news because for the first time in 6.5 years the investigation is free to really address 'other' circumstances.

by tasprin 15.10.13 20:24

Daisy wrote:
Cristobell wrote:Presumably the PJ have the original creche records. The night babysitters were the same nannies that ran the creche and the kids clubs, this must all be traceable, sleeping babies would be signed in and out.

On that chilly night, we are asked to believe a father collected his child, who was wearing only pyjamas, no slippers, and carried her across his arms in the strange manner described by Jane Tanner. Not only did he fail to provide a blanket for the sleeping child, he also failed to provide any bodily warmth by wrapping his arms around her. As Wendy Murphy would say, I'm not buying it.
According to Daily Mail article today, he did use a (pink) blanket. There's pictures of it alongside the childs PJ's he kept all this years.

Not sure how to put the image up but here's the link

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

But where is Madeleine's pink blanket? It was on the bed, but seems to have disappeared with her.

by ultimaThule 15.10.13 20:27

candyfloss wrote:Does anyone know where the babysitting place was? Was it at one of the 3 crèches. Surely they would only use one at night as there couldn't have been too many around at that time of year. Everyone said if was very quiet. Bridget O'Donnell and Jez Wilkins used it the night before, when Jez carried his sleeping 3 year old home.

In May 2007 the evening creche was situated in the reception block which facilitates entry to the pool and tapas bar whistling

by bobbin 15.10.13 20:31

ultimaThule wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Does anyone know where the babysitting place was? Was it at one of the 3 crèches. Surely they would only use one at night as there couldn't have been too many around at that time of year. Everyone said if was very quiet. Bridget O'Donnell and Jez Wilkins used it the night before, when Jez carried his sleeping 3 year old home.
In May 2007 the evening creche was situated in the reception block which facilitates entry to the pool and tapas bar

If that's the case, it's not where the reconstruction put it, and how did the man get to the end of the road to be travelling across in front of Jane heading where? not back to the reconstruction creche...I'm confused....

by Guest 15.10.13 20:32

ultimaThule wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Does anyone know where the babysitting place was? Was it at one of the 3 crèches. Surely they would only use one at night as there couldn't have been too many around at that time of year. Everyone said if was very quiet. Bridget O'Donnell and Jez Wilkins used it the night before, when Jez carried his sleeping 3 year old home.
In May 2007 the evening creche was situated in the reception block which facilitates entry to the pool and tapas bar

Thank you ultimaThule, is it possible for a link to this information please. Only Bridget O'Donnell says it was a 10 min walk from their apartment, and the This is Money article also says it was a bit of a jaunt through cobbled streets and apartments.

by Guest 15.10.13 20:32

bobbin wrote:
ultimaThule wrote:
candyfloss wrote:Does anyone know where the babysitting place was? Was it at one of the 3 crèches. Surely they would only use one at night as there couldn't have been too many around at that time of year. Everyone said if was very quiet. Bridget O'Donnell and Jez Wilkins used it the night before, when Jez carried his sleeping 3 year old home.
In May 2007 the evening creche was situated in the reception block which facilitates entry to the pool and tapas bar
If that's the case, it's not where the reconstruction put it, and how did the man get to the end of the road to be travelling across in front of Jane heading where? not back to the reconstruction creche...I'm confused....

Yes, me too, that is why I was wondering where the evening crèche was.

by Daisy 15.10.13 20:34

tasprin wrote:
Daisy wrote:
Cristobell wrote:Presumably the PJ have the original creche records. The night babysitters were the same nannies that ran the creche and the kids clubs, this must all be traceable, sleeping babies would be signed in and out.

On that chilly night, we are asked to believe a father collected his child, who was wearing only pyjamas, no slippers, and carried her across his arms in the strange manner described by Jane Tanner. Not only did he fail to provide a blanket for the sleeping child, he also failed to provide any bodily warmth by wrapping his arms around her. As Wendy Murphy would say, I'm not buying it.
According to Daily Mail article today, he did use a (pink) blanket. There's pictures of it alongside the childs PJ's he kept all this years.

Not sure how to put the image up but here's the link

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
But where is Madeleine's pink blanket? It was on the bed, but seems to have disappeared with her.

Good question Tasprin. Although the pink blanket apparently disappeared after Madeleine

Just noticed this very interesting thread here.

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

by suzyjohnson 15.10.13 20:37

The most likely explanation regarding crecheman is that he had already been spoken too by the PJ at the time and eliminated from the enquiry, and therefore he wouldn't necessarily contact the police again. Perhaps the PJ are giving JT the benefit of the doubt, assuming her sighting to be the same person as crecheman who may have walked along the road five or ten minutes either way of Tanner's sighting. And possibly SY tracked him down again just to confirm the information he had already told the PJ.

It seems a bit of an unnecessary step for SY to produce a picture of him in his similar clothing though.

Either way SY have discounted whoever JT saw, if anyone, as irrelevant to the enquiry, and as Bobbin says everyone can now concentrate on the Smith sighting, without the JT distraction.

by Praiaaa 15.10.13 20:38

My inexpert opinion is that JT came clean after years of sleepless nights, and SY are saving her face as a quid pro quo. If there really had been an innocent father of course he would have come forward, or been eliminated using creche records, and been exonerated (and would never in any case carry a living child in that way). IMO JT has cracked. IMO the Paynes have also cracked, hence their anonymity in the scenes last night.

by Seek truth 15.10.13 20:38

Daisy wrote:
Cristobell wrote:Presumably the PJ have the original creche records. The night babysitters were the same nannies that ran the creche and the kids clubs, this must all be traceable, sleeping babies would be signed in and out.

On that chilly night, we are asked to believe a father collected his child, who was wearing only pyjamas, no slippers, and carried her across his arms in the strange manner described by Jane Tanner. Not only did he fail to provide a blanket for the sleeping child, he also failed to provide any bodily warmth by wrapping his arms around her. As Wendy Murphy would say, I'm not buying it.
According to Daily Mail article today, he did use a (pink) blanket. There's pictures of it alongside the childs PJ's he kept all this years.

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

THE pink blanket, the very same pink, that is also in the crime watch video on the bed.
Sorry I meant, what I find very similar is the girls pyjamas, just as discribed by Tanner. What a match hey, this innocent man is the exact one she mentioned! After 6 years aswell luckily he still had them! So she was two yrs old? They look a bigger size.

by tasprin 15.10.13 20:41

Daisy wrote:
tasprin wrote:
Daisy wrote:
Cristobell wrote:Presumably the PJ have the original creche records. The night babysitters were the same nannies that ran the creche and the kids clubs, this must all be traceable, sleeping babies would be signed in and out.

On that chilly night, we are asked to believe a father collected his child, who was wearing only pyjamas, no slippers, and carried her across his arms in the strange manner described by Jane Tanner. Not only did he fail to provide a blanket for the sleeping child, he also failed to provide any bodily warmth by wrapping his arms around her. As Wendy Murphy would say, I'm not buying it.
According to Daily Mail article today, he did use a (pink) blanket. There's pictures of it alongside the childs PJ's he kept all this years.

Not sure how to put the image up but here's the link

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
But where is Madeleine's pink blanket? It was on the bed, but seems to have disappeared with her.
Good question Tasprin. Although the pink blanket apparently disappeared after Madeleine

Just noticed this very interesting thread here.

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

Thanks, Daisy. I haven't read that thread but will do so, looks interesting.

by JackieL 15.10.13 20:43

How did Crecheman miss all this?

From Bridget O'Donnell (Jez Wilkins'partner), talking about immediate aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance:

Bridget O'Donnell wrote:The next morning, we made our way to breakfast and met one of the Doctors, the one who had come round in the night. His young daughter looked up at us from her pushchair. There was no news. They had called Sky television - they didn't know what else to do. He turned away and I could see he was going to weep.

People were crying in the restaurant. Mark Warner had handed out letters informing them what had happened in the night, and we all wondered what to do. Mid-sentence, we would drift in to the middle distance. Tears would brim up and recede.

Our daughter asked us about the kiddie club that day. She had been looking forward to their dance show that afternoon. Jes and I looked at each other. My first instinct was that we should not be parted from our children. Of course we shouldn't; we should strap them to us and not let them out of our sight, ever again. But then we thought: how are we going to explain this to our daughter? Or how, if we spent the day in the village, would we avoid repeatedly discussing what had happened in front of her as we met people on the streets? What does a good parent do? Keep the children close or take a deep breath and let them go a little, pretend this was the same as any other day?

We walked towards the kiddie club. No one else was there. We felt awful, such terrible parents for even considering the idea. Then we saw, waiting inside, some of the Mark Warner nannies. They had been up most of the night but had still turned up to work that day. They were intelligent, thoughtful young women and we liked and trusted them. The dance show was cancelled, but they wanted to put on a normal day for the children. Our daughter ran inside and started painting. Then, behind us, another set of parents arrived looking equally washed out. Then another, and another. We decided, in the end, to leave them for two hours. We put their bags on the pegs and saw the one labelled "Madeleine". Heads bent, we walked away, into the guilty glare of the morning sun.

Locals and holidaymakers had started circulating photocopied pictures of Madeleine, while others continued searching the beaches and village apartments. People were talking about what had happened or sat silently, staring blankly. We didn't see any police.
Later, there was a knock on our apartment door and we let the two men in. One was a uniformed Portuguese policeman, the other his translator. The translator had a squint and sweated slightly. He was breathless, perhaps a little excited. We later found out he was Robert Murat. He reminded me of a boy in my class at school who was bullied.
Through Murat we answered a few questions and gave our details, which the policeman wrote down on the back of a bit of paper. No notebook. Then he pointed to the photocopied picture of Madeleine on the table. "Is this your daughter?" he asked. "Er, no," we said. "That's the girl you are meant to be searching for." My heart sank for the McCanns.
As the day drew on, the media and more police arrived and we watched from our balcony as reporters practised their pieces to camera outside the McCanns' apartment. We then went back inside and watched them on the news.
We had to duck under the police tape with the pushchair to buy a pint of milk. We would roll past sniffer dogs, local police, then national police, local journalists, and then international journalists, TV reporters and satellite vans. A hundred pairs of eyes and a dozen cameras silently swivelled as we turned down the bend. We pretended, for the children's sake, that this was nothing unusual. Later on, our daughter saw herself with Daddy on TV. That afternoon we sat by the members-only pool, watching the helicopters watching us. We didn't know what else to do.
Saturday came, our last day. While we waited for the airport coach to pick us up, we gathered round the toddler pool by Tapas, making small talk in front of the children. I watched my baby son and daughter closely, shamefully grateful that I could.
We had not seen the McCanns since Thursday, when suddenly they appeared by the pool. The surreal limbo of the past two days suddenly snapped back into painful, awful realtime. It was a shock: the physical transformation of these two human beings was sickening - I felt it as a physical blow. Kate's back and shoulders, her hands, her mouth had reshaped themselves in to the angular manifestation of a silent scream. I thought I might cry and turned so that she wouldn't see. Gerry was upright, his lips now drawn into a thin, impenetrable line. Some people, including Jes, tried to offer comfort. Some gave them hugs. Some stared at their feet, words eluding them. We all wondered what to do. That was the last time we saw Gerry and Kate.
The rest of us left Praia da Luz together, an isolated Mark Warner group. The coach, the airport, the plane passed quietly. There were no other passengers except us. We arrived at Gatwick in the small hours of an early May morning. No jokes, no banter, just goodbye. Though we did not know it then, those few days in May were going to dominate the rest of our year.

by Daisy 15.10.13 20:50

Seek truth wrote:
Daisy wrote:
Cristobell wrote:Presumably the PJ have the original creche records. The night babysitters were the same nannies that ran the creche and the kids clubs, this must all be traceable, sleeping babies would be signed in and out.

On that chilly night, we are asked to believe a father collected his child, who was wearing only pyjamas, no slippers, and carried her across his arms in the strange manner described by Jane Tanner. Not only did he fail to provide a blanket for the sleeping child, he also failed to provide any bodily warmth by wrapping his arms around her. As Wendy Murphy would say, I'm not buying it.
According to Daily Mail article today, he did use a (pink) blanket. There's pictures of it alongside the childs PJ's he kept all this years.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
THE pink blanket, the very same pink, that is also in the crime watch video on the bed.

Have a look.

I know about the blanket on the bed i've mentioned that earlier. Although we don't know it's the very same blanket do we? According to reports Madeleine's blanket went missing afterwards. (After the she disappeared).