Re: MADDIE COPS PRIME SUSPECT BLUNDER- tomorrows MIRROR 28/12/13

by russiandoll on 01.01.14 10:47

quote Gezza : "that's why the e-fits & sketches are so important to us as it's the best chance of finding Madeleine "

On CW I believe, no wonder Redwood was in a separate section of the studio, anticipating having to listen to this level of barefaced cheek.

by Seek truth on 02.01.14 4:10

@loopzdaloop wrote:
@SixMillionQuid wrote:Who said wishes don't come true?

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

4078    “It’s alright”.

Reply    “But, you know, it’s just the frustration of not being believed on this, it’s”.

4078    “Yeah (inaudible)”.

Reply    “No, but the best thing that could happen to me, apart from Madeleine being found, is somebody coming up and saying ‘That was me’, you know, ‘That was me walking across there’, because, you know, you know, I don’t want that to be Madeleine, but, you know, there’s no, but I’m convinced that was and, you know, people have got to, so I don’t know what I can do to make them believe that. I’m sorry”.

This precise quote is why I didn't believe Tanner.
At that point in time, why was she so defensive and 'frustrated' at not being believed.

It looks a perfect time for a journo to have an interview with her now that the best thing that could happen to her has occurred.

There has always been a perfect time for a journo to have and interview with both of them, even on TV interviews, but it's never happened, wonder why.

Jane's wish came true and it's helped for the search to go on and on and on..

Now they need an innocent father for the Smith sighting, imagine that!

by ScallyScouser on 03.01.14 4:29

@Hongkong Phooey wrote:They did rule out the innocent man six years ago by stating the sighting was made by a fantasist!!! Still think they are nearer the mark than SY

But fact is Tanner did see individual with child in arms, The innocent man did come fourth, With statement it was him who Tanner saw, What i want to know is what did he see at that junction walking in either direction....

Also Andy Redwood in one of his statements says is not necessarily to find a suspect, but also witnesses.in the area at that time

Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-new-mobile-phone-2973968#ixzz2pJ40PUfy
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

by suep on 03.01.14 6:34

@ScallyScouser wrote:
@Hongkong Phooey wrote:They did rule out the innocent man six years ago by stating the sighting was made by a fantasist!!! Still think they are nearer the mark than SY

But fact is Tanner did see individual with child in arms, The innocent man did come fourth, With statement it was him who Tanner saw, What i want to know is what did he see at that junction walking in either direction....

Also Andy Redwood in one of his statements says is not necessarily to find a suspect, but also witnesses.in the area at that time

Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-new-mobile-phone-2973968#ixzz2pJ40PUfy
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

JT is still a 'fantasist' in my opinion, Scallyscouser, because whatever she saw she was incapable of making up her mind about it. First of all she didn't see any facial features, then it was Murat, then someone completely different etc etc. The thing that's always puzzled me is the direction she said the man was walking in which was apparently towards the creche not away from it . Has the man who came forward confirmed this and explained it?

by SixMillionQuid on 03.01.14 7:33

@suep wrote:
@ScallyScouser wrote:
@Hongkong Phooey wrote:They did rule out the innocent man six years ago by stating the sighting was made by a fantasist!!! Still think they are nearer the mark than SY

But fact is Tanner did see individual with child in arms, The innocent man did come fourth, With statement it was him who Tanner saw, What i want to know is what did he see at that junction walking in either direction....

Also Andy Redwood in one of his statements says is not necessarily to find a suspect, but also witnesses.in the area at that time

Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-new-mobile-phone-2973968#ixzz2pJ40PUfy
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

JT is still a 'fantasist' in my opinion, Scallyscouser, because whatever she saw she was incapable of making up her mind about it. First of all she didn't see any facial features, then it was Murat, then someone completely different etc etc. The thing that's always puzzled me is the direction she said the man was walking in which was apparently towards the creche not away from it . Has the man who came forward confirmed this and explained it?

No and not surprisingly Redwood hasn't addressed this issue and no one in the media has answered the question. I mean Jane Tanner is off the hook as far as Operation Grange is concerned so she can carry on with her life without any further intrusion from the media - like that ever happened.

This nameless, faceless man who turned up after six years may as well be a figment of someones imagination, just like Tanners sighting. And the media dont seem to be interested in finding out who this guy was or what apartment he was staying at - because he was never where Jane said she saw Bundleman.

by canada12 on 03.01.14 7:34

Perhaps SY and PJ are waiting for Jane Tanner to contact them and tell them they're wrong - that the man she saw was walking in the opposite direction.

If she doesn't contact them, what will this tell them?

by ScallyScouser on 03.01.14 7:52

@canada12 wrote:Perhaps SY and PJ are waiting for Jane Tanner to contact them and tell them they're wrong - that the man she saw was walking in the opposite direction.

If she doesn't contact them, what will this tell them?

Thing is if he was walking in direction of block 5 then JT would be expected to give running commentary on were he went what floor why she never asked him why av u got ur kid out on a cold night in pj's......... were if he walking in other direction her statement is simply

by SixMillionQuid on 03.01.14 8:02

@canada12 wrote:Perhaps SY and PJ are waiting for Jane Tanner to contact them and tell them they're wrong - that the man she saw was walking in the opposite direction.

If she doesn't contact them, what will this tell them?

When this man materialised from the Astral plane in front of Operation Grange and said "I think Im the guy Jane Tanner saw" they would have contacted JT and got 'her opinion' on this before the Crimewatch program in October 2013. We still dont know if any this has happened. If he is in the clear then I dont understand what the secrecy is. If the current review is being run competently then JT would have been contacted already before the Crimewatch program.

If Operation Grange believes he is an innocent explanation for Jane's sighting then the current PJ must be of the same belief, unless, the PJ are running their own separate investigation. What bothers me is this man is now saying he contacted some unnamed police force, in some universe, in 2007 stating he could be Jane's sighting. Jane's artists impression of the sighting wasn't released until October 2007 leaving him a two month window to make his alibi - there is no such alibi in the PJ files and no reference to this man whatsoever. Leceister police and the PJ discussed Janes artists impression in October 2007 - this man does not feature anywhere in the discusssion. He did not exist.

by Guest on 03.01.14 8:23

@SixMillionQuid wrote:
If Operation Grange believes he is an innocent explanation for Jane's sighting then the current PJ must be of the same belief, unless, the PJ are running their own separate investigation. What bothers me is this man is now saying he contacted some unnamed police force, in some universe, in 2007 stating he could be Jane's sighting. Jane's artists impression of the sighting wasn't released until October 2007 leaving him a two month window to make his alibi - there is no such alibi in the PJ files and no reference to this man whatsoever. Leceister police and the PJ discussed Janes artists impression in October 2007 - this man does not feature anywhere in the discusssion. He did not exist.

Maybe he will give it another five years and admit to being Smithman too?

by tiny on 03.01.14 8:33

@SixMillionQuid wrote:
@canada12 wrote:Perhaps SY and PJ are waiting for Jane Tanner to contact them and tell them they're wrong - that the man she saw was walking in the opposite direction.

If she doesn't contact them, what will this tell them?

When this man materialised from the Astral plane in front of Operation Grange and said "I think Im the guy Jane Tanner saw" they would have contacted JT and got 'her opinion' on this before the Crimewatch program in October 2013. We still dont know if any this has happened. If he is in the clear then I dont understand what the secrecy is. If the current review is being run competently then JT would have been contacted already before the Crimewatch program.

If Operation Grange believes he is an innocent explanation for Jane's sighting then the current PJ must be of the same belief, unless, the PJ are running their own separate investigation. What bothers me is this man is now saying he contacted some unnamed police force, in some universe, in 2007 stating he could be Jane's sighting. Jane's artists impression of the sighting wasn't released until October 2007 leaving him a two month window to make his alibi - there is no such alibi in the PJ files and no reference to this man whatsoever. Leceister police and the PJ discussed Janes artists impression in October 2007 - this man does not feature anywhere in the discusssion. He did not exist.

This is my belief too,jane tanner was not on the street either,she is a liar,so I don't know what game sy are playing at other than trying to bring about a white wash.

by bobbin on 03.01.14 9:40

@tiny wrote:
@SixMillionQuid wrote:
@canada12 wrote:Perhaps SY and PJ are waiting for Jane Tanner to contact them and tell them they're wrong - that the man she saw was walking in the opposite direction.

If she doesn't contact them, what will this tell them?

When this man materialised from the Astral plane in front of Operation Grange and said "I think Im the guy Jane Tanner saw" they would have contacted JT and got 'her opinion' on this before the Crimewatch program in October 2013. We still dont know if any this has happened. If he is in the clear then I dont understand what the secrecy is. If the current review is being run competently then JT would have been contacted already before the Crimewatch program.

If Operation Grange believes he is an innocent explanation for Jane's sighting then the current PJ must be of the same belief, unless, the PJ are running their own separate investigation. What bothers me is this man is now saying he contacted some unnamed police force, in some universe, in 2007 stating he could be Jane's sighting. Jane's artists impression of the sighting wasn't released until October 2007 leaving him a two month window to make his alibi - there is no such alibi in the PJ files and no reference to this man whatsoever. Leceister police and the PJ discussed Janes artists impression in October 2007 - this man does not feature anywhere in the discusssion. He did not exist.
This is my belief too,jane tanner was not on the street either,she is a liar,so I don't know what game sy are playing at other than trying to bring about a white wash.

or successfully blowing Gerry McCanns only alibi apart and leaving the focus on him being seen by Smiths, at 10 p.m. when Gerry has no alibi. spin

Effectively, NO ABDUCTION, therefore, with Matthew Oldfield being the last to look in on the children, and Maddie's blood and cadavour odour being found, attempted concealed, it focusses in on the Tapas 9 again.
I would not want to be Matthew Oldfield at this time, nor his wife and family, with his testimony, even on the mockumentary being so clear that he was there, AFTER Gerry had seen Maddie alive and proudly noting his happy father's moment, and BEFORE Kate went back and discovered that Maddie had disappeared. Calling Matthew Oldfield, your times up....time to come forward and tell it how it really was..... spin

by Hongkong Phooey on 03.01.14 10:51

@ScallyScouser wrote:
@Hongkong Phooey wrote:They did rule out the innocent man six years ago by stating the sighting was made by a fantasist!!! Still think they are nearer the mark than SY

But fact is Tanner did see individual with child in arms, The innocent man did come fourth, With statement it was him who Tanner saw, What i want to know is what did he see at that junction walking in either direction....

Also Andy Redwood in one of his statements says is not necessarily to find a suspect, but also witnesses.in the area at that time

Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-new-mobile-phone-2973968#ixzz2pJ40PUfy
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

Amaral stated that the PJ considered her sighting to be a fantasy, she herself put doubts on it by describing the way the child was being carried and stated in hindsight it would have made more sense for the child to have been carried at the shoulder a la smithman. There are elements of her story which are clearly made up, SY are in my opinion 'at it' their motive remains to be seen.

by suep on 03.01.14 15:26

@Hongkong Phooey wrote:
@ScallyScouser wrote:
@Hongkong Phooey wrote:They did rule out the innocent man six years ago by stating the sighting was made by a fantasist!!! Still think they are nearer the mark than SY

But fact is Tanner did see individual with child in arms, The innocent man did come fourth, With statement it was him who Tanner saw, What i want to know is what did he see at that junction walking in either direction....

Also Andy Redwood in one of his statements says is not necessarily to find a suspect, but also witnesses.in the area at that time

Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-new-mobile-phone-2973968#ixzz2pJ40PUfy
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook
Amaral stated that the PJ considered her sighting to be a fantasy, she herself put doubts on it by describing the way the child was being carried and stated in hindsight it would have made more sense for the child to have been carried at the shoulder a la smithman. There are elements of her story which are clearly made up, SY are in my opinion 'at it' their motive remains to be seen.

From a Statement Analysis point of view her rogatory interview reeks of deception. And we mustn't forget that the tannerman e-fit is still prominently displayed on the McC's website. What message does that send to SY? Why would they want to do that? It makes no sense to me.Do they still have an 'active' private investigation going?

by Guest on 03.01.14 16:02

Do they still have an 'active' private investigation going?

Yes, I've been wondering that too. What are they using the Fund for, apart from legal fees.

by suep on 03.01.14 20:06

Yes. Phenomenal legal fees all made necessary because of their need to maintain the story of an abduction and aggressively divert understandable speculation about alternative explanations for the disappearance of their child.
Yes the search for Madeleine continues. Its what we're all doing. The difference is they want us to believe she will someday return alive whereas the evidence tells us we're looking for a dead almost four year old. I take no pleasure whatsoever from pointing that out but as a realist I can't see any other alternative. This is my opinion,of course.

by **PeterMac** on 05.01.14 10:25

I love the bit about misunderstanding what the vocation of being a Burglar entails . . . ! Brilliant put-down.

by suep on 05.01.14 10:51

Nice find, Peter Mac!!

by tiny on 05.01.14 11:05

that's more of the truth,wonder who wrote it

by plebgate on 05.01.14 12:14

Who wrote it?

Don't know, but a fool he/she is not.

by aiyoyo on 05.01.14 16:59

That's a Mccracker.

Meanwhile the representative of Mr Gerry Psychkato, the pink spokescreature, has swallowed a whole turkey hence unfortunately unable to comment until further notice.

Keep your eyes peeled for more Mcbits of Croak coming up soon..............

by NickE on 06.01.14 21:27

Clarence Mitchell talking about Maddy,Sky News 2008:
"She WAS a child".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXp3NdV9JF0
3 minutes in

by diatribe on 07.02.14 13:17

@marconi wrote:

Another theory: Somebody of the Yard said that there will be a possibility that the PJ could arrest people in England and that the Yard could do the same in Portugal.
My theory is that that is a game, to catch the MCanns. It is a way to force them to go to Belgravia and to confess the truth because they probably prefer to be arrested by the Met and than by the PJ, which will take them to Portugal, a different culture, another language, poor prisons, far from their families, different food...

The Portugese police would not have the power of arrest in the UK anymore that the British police would in Portugal. That's what makes the Met. Police going to Portugal to interview spurious 'burglars' even more nonsensical , because apart from anything else ,they wouldn't have the jurisdiction rights to do so and would only be able to sit in on interviews with the permission of the Portugese police.

The McCann's would fare far better in the portugese justice system than their english counterpart and if convicted, spend about half the time in gaol as they would in the latter. The sentencing guidelines in the UK are probably the most draconian outside of the US in the western hemisphere. Despite the Daily Mail rhetoric, there aren't many countries on this planet where it would be worse to be 'Banged up Abroad' than the UK.

MADDIE COPS PRIME SUSPECT BLUNDER- tomorrows MIRROR 28/12/13