Re: McCanns dispute DCI Redwood's dismissal of Tannerman

by Okeydokey 28.01.14 22:29

Dee Coy wrote:
Mirage wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:Seems to me no-one wants to have been the last to see Madeleine. Much as they appear to want to help the MCs, in my opinion they draw the line at this point and would prefer to leave 'the last sighting' firmly at Gerry's ajar door.
Maybe that is the reason GM won't corroborate Tanner's story of being in the street. The hot potato is being passed on camera and she knows it. Maybe that's why Tanner is crying in the Mockumentary recon, because she knows she has just been manoeuvred into the position that everyone else has studiously avoided - that of being the very last member of the Tapas 9 to see MBM. And for some reason, best known to herself, she cannot argue the point any further and retires hurt.

Bingo! Once she'd verbally given birth to the idea of Tannerman to the investigators, she couldn't then do a volte-face and deny him. This would be breaking the pact and labelling herself as a foolish and unreliable witness.

But I bet she didn't bargain for a final toss of the potato that Gerry gave her to catch alone. There were 3 people present in the street at the time but both Tanner and her abductor inexplicably and suddenly donned an invisibility cloak to the two other witnesses. What a charmer Gerry is. Bet he's spitting now Andy's come to her rescue, and the blackened and charred spud has finally rolled to a halt at his feet.

All my own wild speculation, needless to add.

I really don't follow this...

You're saying that GMcC claiming not to see her in the street, makes her the last person to see MBM? How does that work?

by bobbin 28.01.14 22:34

Okeydokey wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:
Mirage wrote:
Dee Coy wrote:Seems to me no-one wants to have been the last to see Madeleine. Much as they appear to want to help the MCs, in my opinion they draw the line at this point and would prefer to leave 'the last sighting' firmly at Gerry's ajar door.
Maybe that is the reason GM won't corroborate Tanner's story of being in the street. The hot potato is being passed on camera and she knows it. Maybe that's why Tanner is crying in the Mockumentary recon, because she knows she has just been manoeuvred into the position that everyone else has studiously avoided - that of being the very last member of the Tapas 9 to see MBM. And for some reason, best known to herself, she cannot argue the point any further and retires hurt.

Bingo! Once she'd verbally given birth to the idea of Tannerman to the investigators, she couldn't then do a volte-face and deny him. This would be breaking the pact and labelling herself as a foolish and unreliable witness.

But I bet she didn't bargain for a final toss of the potato that Gerry gave her to catch alone. There were 3 people present in the street at the time but both Tanner and her abductor inexplicably and suddenly donned an invisibility cloak to the two other witnesses. What a charmer Gerry is. Bet he's spitting now Andy's come to her rescue, and the blackened and charred spud has finally rolled to a halt at his feet.

All my own wild speculation, needless to add.

I really don't follow this...

You're saying that GMcC claiming not to see her in the street, makes her the last person to see MBM? How does that work?

It's self evident, don't know why you're not following this. Read the following comments.

by Guest 28.01.14 22:58

Okeydokey wrote:

I really don't follow this...

You're saying that GMcC claiming not to see her in the street, makes her the last person to see MBM? How does that work?

Jane seeing Tannerman was the last of the Tapas 9 to see Madeleine, according to the official Tapas group's version of events. I'm simply suggesting that I empathize with Mirage's tentative theory that Tanner would have safely presumed she was one of 3 who could claim to have made the last sighting - herself, Gerry and Wilkin. She'll have been horrified when they both claimed they not only never saw Tannerman, but Tanner as well, even though she had to squeeze by them. Her safety in numbers as one of the last sighters was stripped away when Gerry came up with the convoluted 'other-side-of-the-road' bunkum. She was left high and dry and holding the potato alone.

No love lost between them, it would appear. Were her tears on the mockumentary tears of frustrated betrayal? Own opinion and supposition, again.

by Okeydokey 28.01.14 23:51

Dee Coy wrote:
Okeydokey wrote:

I really don't follow this...

You're saying that GMcC claiming not to see her in the street, makes her the last person to see MBM? How does that work?
Jane seeing Tannerman was the last of the Tapas 9 to see Madeleine, according to the official Tapas group's version of events. I'm simply suggesting that I empathize with Mirage's tentative theory that Tanner would have safely presumed she was one of 3 who could claim to have made the last sighting - herself, Gerry and Wilkin. She'll have been horrified when they both claimed they not only never saw Tannerman, but Tanner as well, even though she had to squeeze by them. Her safety in numbers as one of the last sighters was stripped away when Gerry came up with the convoluted 'other-side-of-the-road' bunkum. She was left high and dry and holding the potato alone.

No love lost between them, it would appear. Were her tears on the mockumentary tears of frustrated betrayal? Own opinion and supposition, again.

You mean saw her last as in she saw her being abducted? True, but then, according to the official version, she has nothing to fear from that personally does she?

by jeanmonroe 29.01.14 0:01

But if you follow this to a logical conclusion, JT was NOT the last to 'see' Madeleine was she?

The Smith family members possibly were, according to Redwood.

However, if it wasn't Madeleine the Smith's 'saw' then .....erm.

DCI Redwood has said JT did NOT see Madeleine being carried off, she supposedly saw crecheman with his child, NOT Madeleine.

Maybe Gerry is hoping that DCI Redwood pulls in the Smiths, as the last people to possibly have seen Madeleine.

Let's face it, Gerry McCann NEEDS absolutely anyone, but him, to have been the last one to have seen a 'live' Madeleine.

It was supposed to be his friend Jane Tanner, but no longer.

If not her then it was supposed to be M Oldfield.

If he could/can 'put it on' the Smiths, he will.

Have absolutely no doubts about that!

by Mirage 29.01.14 0:17

jeanmonroe wrote:But if you follow this to a logical conclusion, JT was NOT the last to 'see' Madeleine was she?

The Smith family members were, according to Redwood.

However, if it wasn't Madeleine they 'saw' then .....erm.

True, the Smith family bore witness to a man carrying a child. Possible MBM, possibly not. But in terms of the last person/s - other than random strangers walking up the street - the significant last view of MBM by a person with a link to the child is no longer KM or GM, or MO. It is JT. And that particular crutch has now been removed from GM and he is stewing in his juices in Rothley as a result (Deo volente).
If AR has sussed that the control freakery of this pair is their Achilles Heel and kept them out of the loop, whilst pretending to keep them in the loop, then he will be esteemed by me forever more. If not, well....... we won't be previous.

by jeanmonroe 29.01.14 0:23

Maybe Redwood is delivering a UK signed EAW for the Portuguese detectives to be able to use and make arrests in the UK!

BHH: "It's a formal arrangement, it allows officers from each country to work in the other country, it gives them powers associated with that...."

I wonder if the Met will afford Portuguese detectives the same curtesy if they ask to come to the UK to question 3 suspects they suspect could be involved in the case.

by Mirage 29.01.14 0:45

jeanmonroe wrote:Maybe Redwood is delivering a UK signed EAW for the Portuguese detectives to be able to use and make arrests in the UK!

BHH: "It's a formal arrangement, it allows officers from each country to work in the other country, it gives them powers associated with that...."

I wonder if the Met will afford Portuguese detectives the same curtesy if they ask to come to the UK to question 3 suspects they suspect could be involved in the case.

I did wonder about a EAW in all seriousness. I think certain parties may have been advised that they have come to the end of their lollipop and that public opinion may have claimed the day. I don't think the MET have any choice frankly. Two countries involved. Public unease, because, despite the censorship that's gone on, people know all right. The cat was out of the bag with the publication of the pj files and The Truth of the Lie. The libel trial has been an unmitigated disaster for the Mcs and someone has to think about damage limitation before GA wades in with a defence that will reveal, warts and all, the shillyshallying that has gone on around this couple for more years than most of us care to remember.

by jeanmonroe 29.01.14 1:04

Redwood didn't seem in any hurry to 'collar the crims' did he?

A meeting, then lunch!

He'd better watch out Auntie Phil dosen't start giving him grief about him taking lunch instead of vigorously investigating!

by Dr What 29.01.14 11:39

With Tanner's sighting now discounted, with Oldfield apparently only seeing the twins in the bedroom[??], I believe the last non-McCann to see Maddie would appear to be the very kind and considerate David Payne, when he 'checked' on a towelled-up Kate and the 3 pyjama-clad children.
Of course, no-one can be sure exactly how long he stayed, anytime between a few seconds to half an hour according to whose account you read.

by sami 29.01.14 11:49

Dr What wrote:With Tanner's sighting now discounted, with Oldfield apparently only seeing the twins in the bedroom[??], I believe the last non-McCann to see Maddie would appear to be the very kind and considerate David Payne, when he 'checked' on a towelled-up Kate and the 3 pyjama-clad children.
Of course, no-one can be sure exactly how long he stayed, anytime between a few seconds to half an hour according to whose account you read.

That particular event was not in the Crimewatch reconstruction. So are we allowed to include it ? If not, then we must go right back to circa 5 or 5.30 pm when the high tea took place. Who saw her then ?

by Guest 29.01.14 12:17

Manuela, the cook at approximately 4.30pm.

by jozi 29.01.14 12:31

Ladyinred wrote:Manuela, the cook at approximately 4.30pm.

How did he know it was her (Maddie ) did he know her personally ? Could be any child he saw !!!

by Guest 29.01.14 12:42

From McCannfiles:

Madeleine returns to Minis Club

Catriona Baker, in her first statement in May 2007, says that Kate brought Madeleine back to the Minis Club at 14:50. But when interviewed later, in April 2008, she states that she can't remember who brought Madeleine back.

Ms Baker mentions that the children went swimming that afternoon but doesn't specifically mention Madeleine. It is unclear what she means by 'swimming', but presumably she means in a childrens swimming pool rather than the sea.

The PJ recorded the following statement from Tapas cook Manuela M.A.J. (contained on the DVD files): 'When asked she says that the last time she saw Madeleine was at approx 16h30, on 3 May 2007, when she was having dinner with the other children in their portion of the restaurant where the witness works, as happens every day of the week.'

by bobbin 29.01.14 13:01

Ladyinred wrote:From McCannfiles:

Madeleine returns to Minis Club

Catriona Baker, in her first statement in May 2007, says that Kate brought Madeleine back to the Minis Club at 14:50. But when interviewed later, in April 2008, she states that she can't remember who brought Madeleine back.

Ms Baker mentions that the children went swimming that afternoon but doesn't specifically mention Madeleine. It is unclear what she means by 'swimming', but presumably she means in a childrens swimming pool rather than the sea.

The PJ recorded the following statement from Tapas cook Manuela M.A.J. (contained on the DVD files): 'When asked she says that the last time she saw Madeleine was at approx 16h30 , on 3 May 2007, when she was having dinner with the other children in their portion of the restaurant where the witness works, as happens every day of the week.'

Does anyone know which restaurant Manuela was working at , was it the Paraiso or the Tapas, or other.
The CCTV for Paraiso shows that no McCs were present, on 3rd May.
Kate says that her kids ate at the Tapas at 5.30 on 3rd May where Kate met up with them after her jogging and Gerry had apparently collected them from creche at 5.30 too.

by Guest 29.01.14 13:10

The PJ recorded the following statement from Tapas cook Manuela M.A.J. (contained on the DVD files): 'When asked she says that the last time she saw Madeleine was at approx 16h30 , on 3 May 2007, when she was having dinner with the other children in their portion of the restaurant where the witness works, as happens every day of the week.'

She worked in the Tapas restaurant.

by bobbin 29.01.14 13:21

Ladyinred wrote:The PJ recorded the following statement from Tapas cook Manuela M.A.J. (contained on the DVD files): 'When asked she says that the last time she saw Madeleine was at approx 16h30 , on 3 May 2007, when she was having dinner with the other children in their portion of the restaurant where the witness works, as happens every day of the week.'

She worked in the Tapas restaurant.

Thanks Ladyinred,
but she says approx 16.30 which is nowhere near to 17.30 in terms of serving food up, especially as Gerry apparently collected the kids AT 17.30 according to the creche records.
Also, the kids were always in creche till about 17.30 so why would Manuela expect to be serving dinner, at 16.30
There's something askew here.
I'm not saying Manuela is making a 'false' statement, solely that any child appearing to be Madeleine at 16.30 doesn't fit with the other 'statements' from Kate, Gerry or creche records and the usual daily routine of leaving the kids in the creche for as long as possible for more 'parent-me-me-me time'.

by Doug D 29.01.14 14:18

Trouble is nothing fits with KM statements & the crèche records!

Don’t forget it is KM that ‘signed for’ the twins at 5.25 & M at 5.30 just as she was getting back from her run & finding ‘M & the twins already having their tea with Gerry. The others had decided to feed their kids at the beachside restaurant, the Paraiso. Madeleine was sitting on the Tapas terrace, eating’ (P.66)

Yet according to Manuela:

‘that the last time she saw Madeleine was at approx 16h30 , on 3 May 2007, when she was having dinner with the other children in their portion of the restaurant where the witness works, as happens every day of the week.

So based on these two stories, (is that a better word than statements?) a ‘nearly four year old’ was still going strong eating after an hour.

by worriedmum 29.01.14 15:48

''Don’t forget it is KM that ‘signed for’ the twins at 5.25 & M at 5.30 just as she was getting back from her run & finding ‘M & the twins already having their tea with Gerry. The others had decided to feed their kids at the beachside restaurant, the Paraiso. Madeleine was sitting on the Tapas terrace, eating’ (P.66)''

I think this has been explained somewhere , Doug. IIRC the creche sheets were taken to high tea and signed as the parents collected them..........

by Guest 29.01.14 16:01

worriedmum wrote:''Don’t forget it is KM that ‘signed for’ the twins at 5.25 & M at 5.30 just as she was getting back from her run & finding ‘M & the twins already having their tea with Gerry. The others had decided to feed their kids at the beachside restaurant, the Paraiso. Madeleine was sitting on the Tapas terrace, eating’ (P.66)''

I think this has been explained somewhere , Doug. IIRC the creche sheets were taken to high tea and signed as the parents collected them..........

But if the twins and Madeleine were all eating at the Tapas, why the two different times? 5.25 and 5.30. You would expect that she would have signed them both at the same time.

by sami 29.01.14 16:06

dantezebu wrote:
worriedmum wrote:''Don’t forget it is KM that ‘signed for’ the twins at 5.25 & M at 5.30 just as she was getting back from her run & finding ‘M & the twins already having their tea with Gerry. The others had decided to feed their kids at the beachside restaurant, the Paraiso. Madeleine was sitting on the Tapas terrace, eating’ (P.66)''

I think this has been explained somewhere , Doug. IIRC the creche sheets were taken to high tea and signed as the parents collected them..........

But if the twins and Madeleine were all eating at the Tapas, why the two different times? 5.25 and 5.30. You would expect that she would have signed them both at the same time.

The twins and Madeleine were in separate buildings in different areas for their crèches. That might explain the five minutes difference.

by Guest 29.01.14 16:07

sami wrote:
dantezebu wrote:
worriedmum wrote:''Don’t forget it is KM that ‘signed for’ the twins at 5.25 & M at 5.30 just as she was getting back from her run & finding ‘M & the twins already having their tea with Gerry. The others had decided to feed their kids at the beachside restaurant, the Paraiso. Madeleine was sitting on the Tapas terrace, eating’ (P.66)''

I think this has been explained somewhere , Doug. IIRC the creche sheets were taken to high tea and signed as the parents collected them..........

But if the twins and Madeleine were all eating at the Tapas, why the two different times? 5.25 and 5.30. You would expect that she would have signed them both at the same time.

The twins and Madeleine were in separate buildings in different areas for their crèches. That might explain the five minutes difference.

Yes but they were all eating at the Tapas together.

by sami 29.01.14 16:15

dantezebu wrote:
sami wrote:
dantezebu wrote:
worriedmum wrote:''Don’t forget it is KM that ‘signed for’ the twins at 5.25 & M at 5.30 just as she was getting back from her run & finding ‘M & the twins already having their tea with Gerry. The others had decided to feed their kids at the beachside restaurant, the Paraiso. Madeleine was sitting on the Tapas terrace, eating’ (P.66)''

I think this has been explained somewhere , Doug. IIRC the creche sheets were taken to high tea and signed as the parents collected them..........

But if the twins and Madeleine were all eating at the Tapas, why the two different times? 5.25 and 5.30. You would expect that she would have signed them both at the same time.

The twins and Madeleine were in separate buildings in different areas for their crèches. That might explain the five minutes difference.

Yes but they were all eating at the Tapas together.

Sorry I must be misunderstanding you. I thought she signed at one crèche at 5.25 then at the other at 5.30, then went to the tapas for tea. I didn't read it as having signed at the tapas ? I'm muddled today.

by Guest 29.01.14 16:17

I think the Nannies took the creche forms to the Tapas with them for signing out.
So they should be all together. The forms and the children.

by **PeterMac** 29.01.14 16:19

sami wrote:
Sorry I must be misunderstanding you. I thought she signed at one crèche at 5.25 then at the other at 5.30, then went to the tapas for tea. I didn't read it as having signed at the tapas ? I'm muddled today.

I don't think you are muddled. I think the story is simply total hogwash. Or should I say BOTH stories
IF the creche staff had delivered the children to the Tapas bar then Gerry would have signed for them !
But he didn't.

And in reply to the next post, how can they possibly take the creche sheets to the Tapas bar. What do they then do when another parent arrives at the creche to collect a child ?

by Guest 29.01.14 16:42

PeterMac wrote:
sami wrote:
Sorry I must be misunderstanding you. I thought she signed at one crèche at 5.25 then at the other at 5.30, then went to the tapas for tea. I didn't read it as having signed at the tapas ? I'm muddled today.

I don't think you are muddled. I think the story is simply total hogwash. Or should I say BOTH stories
IF the creche staff had delivered the children to the Tapas bar then Gerry would have signed for them !
But he didn't.

And in reply to the next post, how can they possibly take the creche sheets to the Tapas bar. What do they then do when another parent arrives at the creche to collect a child ?

I thought that they would take all remaining kids to the Tapas for collection, as who would be with them in the creches?

ETA: A parent can't sign off a child at the creche if the child is in the Tapas.

by **PeterMac** 29.01.14 17:31

dantezebu wrote:
I thought that they would take all remaining kids to the Tapas for collection, as who would be with them in the creches?
ETA: A parent can't sign off a child at the creche if the child is in the Tapas.

So how would a parent know their child was going to be in the Tapas ?
And why there, since only the TM group were in that part of the town. There are several other complexes served by the creches.
It is one of those wonderful Kate-Konfusion stories, that makes absolutely no sense IF you believe Madeleine was still alive on 3rd.
If, however, you think that there is no evidence of continued existence on 3rd, and that she may have met her fate earlier,
then this story is a perfect example of a hugely ambitious and over elaborate attempt at retro-fitting.

by bobbin 29.01.14 17:45

PeterMac wrote:
dantezebu wrote:
I thought that they would take all remaining kids to the Tapas for collection, as who would be with them in the creches?
ETA: A parent can't sign off a child at the creche if the child is in the Tapas.
So how would a parent know their child was going to be in the Tapas ?
And why there, since only the TM group were in that part of the town. There are several other complexes served by the creches.
It is one of those wonderful Kate-Konfusion stories, that makes absolutely no sense IF you believe Madeleine was still alive on 3rd.
If, however, you think that there is no evidence of continued existence on 3rd, and that she may have met her fate earlier,
then this story is a perfect example of a hugely ambitious and over elaborate attempt at retro-fitting.

and Manuela was probably confusing one child for any other, especially if the parents had made efforts to make it appear that such a child was Maddie.
On the CCTV at Paraiso, is it confirmed just which children are visible and / or not. Just thinking that maybe Ella Tanner/O'Brien or even the Naylor child could have been at the Tapas too.
Who knows as you say, it's all hogwash anyway, except that it's valuable to be able to put on record such inconsistencies, for later use in a court room.

by sami 29.01.14 17:50

There is no way a childcare facility will have such an ambiguous collection policy.

Call to the crèche, sure if we are not there try the tapas.

This results in parents wandering about looking for children.

It also prolongs the working day for the nannies who end up in the tapas looking after children whose parents are late playing tennis.

I understood the purpose of the nannies being at high tea was to socialise with parents and children. It was not an extension of the daycare facility.

We cannot figure out the system suggested by Kate for discussion purposes. How then could it be explained in multiple languages and put into practice.

I don't believe their account and taken in context with all of the others in their group being placed away from the complex on that Thursday evening, you have to wonder what the McCanns were doing at tea time.

by Guest 29.01.14 18:33

I don't believe Madeleine was in the Tapas on the 1st. Which is why I questioned the timings on the sheet.
But what I'm trying to say is this; if some children were picked up from the creche and some were picked up from the Tapas then 2 signing out sheets for each creche would be needed.
One to stay in the creche and one to be taken to the Tapas. Because a parent would not be expected to sign for the child in the creche if it was in the Tapas (and vice versa.) ie you shouldn't be expected to sign for your child without seeing it first.
I would have thought for a typcal creche the arrangement in these circumstances would be:
That you could pick your child up from the creches until a particular time (say 4.30), and after that then the pick up would be at the Tapas, until the creche closed.
Keeping all the children together, with the nannies.

Latest topics