WHEN JANE TANNER CRIED

by Halfwit 16.02.14 5:52

Unable to sleep I've been thinking back to when she burst into tears in (I think) the first reconstruction.

Maybe she cries easily, I don't, but she was overcome with tears and I feel sure that they were genuine. At the time I thought she was reliving a sad memory and my heart went out to her.

Now I think she realised at that moment that she was being thrown to the wolves. Gerry really was denying her on camera. She may have been silly, I won't and can't excuse the silly cow, but I'm wondering if she came to any sense she might have and did the right thing.

by plebgate 16.02.14 10:33

I don't know if any of them have "spilled any beans", but have we had any pics of Mrs. seen with her BFF Fiona in the past year?

At the last Marathon it was claimed that JT was going to run with Mrs. no mention of Fi. - who has been her running mate for some time I believe.

Has the BFF relationship cooled? Is JT the new BFF? If so, WHY? So many, many questions and not one blinking answer forthcoming from anywhere - I believe something is deffo going on and hopefully will break before May.

by Cristobell 16.02.14 10:52

Halfwit wrote:Unable to sleep I've been thinking back to when she burst into tears in (I think) the first reconstruction.

Maybe she cries easily, I don't, but she was overcome with tears and I feel sure that they were genuine. At the time I thought she was reliving a sad memory and my heart went out to her.

Now I think she realised at that moment that she was being thrown to the wolves. Gerry really was denying her on camera. She may have been silly, I won't and can't excuse the silly cow, but I'm wondering if she came to any sense she might have and did the right thing.

I thought her tears were genuine too, a mixture of emotions that spilled out. I felt then that she would not withstand much interrogation before telling the truth. She lacks the callous determination of Gerry and Kate, who have never once in 7 years 'burst into tears'.

by Guest 16.02.14 10:59

Halfwit wrote:Unable to sleep I've been thinking back to when she burst into tears in (I think) the first reconstruction.

Maybe she cries easily, I don't, but she was overcome with tears and I feel sure that they were genuine. At the time I thought she was reliving a sad memory and my heart went out to her.

Now I think she realised at that moment that she was being thrown to the wolves. Gerry really was denying her on camera. She may have been silly, I won't and can't excuse the silly cow, but I'm wondering if she came to any sense she might have and did the right thing.

The tears were after she was summarily pooh-poohed by Gerry after he hastily stepped in after the 'Kate was moaning that you'd been gone a long time watching the football' comment. The order of sequence showed the tears after she described the child being carried away to make it seem like she was in despair at not putting 2 and 2 together at the time.

But looking at the lighting and everyone's positions it does indicate that the crying was just after Gerry had swept her aside and the circle of men 'encouraged' her to accept Gerry's memory as the correct one and not hers. Gerry's version was the final cut frozen for ever on film. I think the tears were of humiliation, shock, frustration and tredpidation. The chronological order of events has been edited to give the tears a more 'appropriate' role in documentary.

by Guest 16.02.14 11:13

Also, no wonder Gerry shut her up after the football comment, surely? Big slip-up there. No mention of any football on disppearance night in any other official McCann version. Examinition of that would completely screw-up all subsequent timelines and official accounts of what happened.

What possessed Jane to bring football into the already unequal equation? And why wasn't it edited out of the documentary? Perhaps because Jane was in floods immediately afterwards and refused to do a retake?

by Woofer 16.02.14 12:21

Cristobell wrote:
Halfwit wrote:Unable to sleep I've been thinking back to when she burst into tears in (I think) the first reconstruction.

Maybe she cries easily, I don't, but she was overcome with tears and I feel sure that they were genuine. At the time I thought she was reliving a sad memory and my heart went out to her.

Now I think she realised at that moment that she was being thrown to the wolves. Gerry really was denying her on camera. She may have been silly, I won't and can't excuse the silly cow, but I'm wondering if she came to any sense she might have and did the right thing.

I thought her tears were genuine too, a mixture of emotions that spilled out. I felt then that she would not withstand much interrogation before telling the truth. She lacks the callous determination of Gerry and Kate, who have never once in 7 years 'burst into tears'.

I agree about Jane Tanner and wonder sometimes if she was entirely unaware of the scenario being enacted around her at 9.15pm.

See below for Kate genuinely bursting into tears at about 5.25 mins.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDLZh1cxdGc

by tiny 16.02.14 12:28

I believe that kate KNOWS what happened to Madeleine,but kates tears didn't last long.

why was Gerry grinning or smirking

by **PeterMac** 16.02.14 13:11

And the question was about "intrusion into your life", nothing about Madeleine, but all about Kate.
was this post "I couldn't make love to Gerry," or had she not been paid her half million for that
Perhaps she was worried that it would spoil the payout.

by Cristobell 16.02.14 14:24

Woofer wrote:
Cristobell wrote:
Halfwit wrote:Unable to sleep I've been thinking back to when she burst into tears in (I think) the first reconstruction.

Maybe she cries easily, I don't, but she was overcome with tears and I feel sure that they were genuine. At the time I thought she was reliving a sad memory and my heart went out to her.

Now I think she realised at that moment that she was being thrown to the wolves. Gerry really was denying her on camera. She may have been silly, I won't and can't excuse the silly cow, but I'm wondering if she came to any sense she might have and did the right thing.

I thought her tears were genuine too, a mixture of emotions that spilled out. I felt then that she would not withstand much interrogation before telling the truth. She lacks the callous determination of Gerry and Kate, who have never once in 7 years 'burst into tears'.

I agree about Jane Tanner and wonder sometimes if she was entirely unaware of the scenario being enacted around her at 9.15pm.

See below for Kate genuinely bursting into tears at about 5.25 mins.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDLZh1cxdGc

Hi Woofer, yes I have seen that video several times trying to decipher what triggered the tears. And yes, I apologise, these are real tears.

There is another occasion, the BBC documentary where Kate is very casually dressed (tracksuit top) describing the scene when Madeleine asked why they didn't come to her when she cried. On that occasion she is clearly crying for herself, probably thinking 'shit the public are going to hate me for this, its not fair' - because the following day looking very serene and in full make up, she petulantly says when Madeleine asked why she didn't come, she makes of point of saying the question was 'not just to mummy by the way'.

In the Irish interview, I would go for the reference to the twins (I do wish they would stop naming them) - but I cannot be sure if it is genuine concern for them or that something else might be taken away from her. There is no doubt she is a narcissist, confirmed by her book, so therefore everything relates as to how it affects her. Immediately preceding the tears, Gerry is reciting the set script, something she herself knows by heart - so presumably no triggers there. However, beneath that narcissistic exterior it may be possible that the real loss (Madeleine's future) might have struck a chord. It may even have been facing the prospect that Madeleine could have had a life (with someone else) if what happened hadn't happened. Madeleine spent the twins' first Christmas with her grandparents, and there were rumours that the McCanns wanted to give her care to someone else. I think Madeleine was a difficult child, three years demand a huge amount of attention. As all parents know, the terrible twos goes way beyond the second birthday.

by russiandoll 16.02.14 14:55

Cristobell, what is your source for the statement that Maddie spent the twins' 1st Christmas with her grandparents?

by worriedmum 16.02.14 15:15

Cristobell wrote
''
In the Irish interview, I would go for the reference to the twins''

I agree Cristobell.

In this interview too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P454NALj8c

by Cristobell 16.02.14 15:53

russiandoll wrote:Cristobell, what is your source for the statement that Maddie spent the twins' 1st Christmas with her grandparents?

Now you are asking. I read it a long time ago, it was reported in several places, but I cannot remember where. I'm happy for admin to remove it if a source isn't available.

by Guest 16.02.14 16:09

Eileen McCann gave an interview in which she said that Madeleine had spent Christmas 2005 with her. I took this to mean that she was there with the rest of her family but others took it literally to mean that she was there on her own.

If I can find the interview I'll post it.

I definitely don't think there's proof that she was there on her own.

P.S. Found it quickly. http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/madeleine-mccann-christmas-appeal-from.html

Sorry Anna, I don't agree with your interpretation of Eileen's words! All she meant from the way I read them is that the McCanns were there for Christmas 2005 but next time they came for new year instead.

by Halfwit 17.02.14 3:56

Dee Coy wrote:
Halfwit wrote:Unable to sleep I've been thinking back to when she burst into tears in (I think) the first reconstruction.

Maybe she cries easily, I don't, but she was overcome with tears and I feel sure that they were genuine. At the time I thought she was reliving a sad memory and my heart went out to her.

Now I think she realised at that moment that she was being thrown to the wolves. Gerry really was denying her on camera. She may have been silly, I won't and can't excuse the silly cow, but I'm wondering if she came to any sense she might have and did the right thing.
The tears were after she was summarily pooh-poohed by Gerry after he hastily stepped in after the 'Kate was moaning that you'd been gone a long time watching the football' comment. The order of sequence showed the tears after she described the child being carried away to make it seem like she was in despair at not putting 2 and 2 together at the time.

But looking at the lighting and everyone's positions it does indicate that the crying was just after Gerry had swept her aside and the circle of men 'encouraged' her to accept Gerry's memory as the correct one and not hers. Gerry's version was the final cut frozen for ever on film. I think the tears were of humiliation, shock, frustration and tredpidation. The chronological order of events has been edited to give the tears a more 'appropriate' role in documentary.

Thank you everyone who replied. Still trying to find my way around the forum so I'm sorry but don't know who I'm quoting but I think you've summed it up.

Thank you too to the poster for the Irish interview, I hadn't seen that before. But Kate didn't burst into tears, she dissolved and it was 'fade picture'.

There's an enormous difference (IMO) between bursting into tears because they overtake you despite your resolve - they come at you like a tsunami out of nowhere - and dissolving into tears. Dissolving is a quiet acquiesence. It doesn't mean the tears are less real.

by **tigger** 17.02.14 6:32

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Eileen McCann gave an interview in which she said that Madeleine had spent Christmas 2005 with her. I took this to mean that she was there with the rest of her family but others took it literally to mean that she was there on her own.

If I can find the interview I'll post it.

I definitely don't think there's proof that she was there on her own.

P.S. Found it quickly. http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/madeleine-mccann-christmas-appeal-from.html

Sorry Anna, I don't agree with your interpretation of Eileen's words! All she meant from the way I read them is that the McCanns were there for Christmas 2005 but next time they came for new year instead.

From the link above:

She said: "When she was two, Madeleine spent Christmas at my house and it was lovely.
"The next year, the family came up for New Year but on Christmas Day Madeleine called and said she'd got a kitchen from Santa. She was very excited and said 'I'm going to make some tea'."
Unquote

I definitely interpret that as Maddie being there on her own, the 'family' would otherwise have been mentioned, it being the first Christmas with the twins.
Imo it would be logical to say otherwise that the family came up for Christmas with a mention of the twins.

by sami 17.02.14 9:18

tigger wrote:
No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Eileen McCann gave an interview in which she said that Madeleine had spent Christmas 2005 with her. I took this to mean that she was there with the rest of her family but others took it literally to mean that she was there on her own.

If I can find the interview I'll post it.

I definitely don't think there's proof that she was there on her own.

P.S. Found it quickly. http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/madeleine-mccann-christmas-appeal-from.html

Sorry Anna, I don't agree with your interpretation of Eileen's words! All she meant from the way I read them is that the McCanns were there for Christmas 2005 but next time they came for new year instead.

From the link above:

She said: "When she was two, Madeleine spent Christmas at my house and it was lovely.
"The next year, the family came up for New Year but on Christmas Day Madeleine called and said she'd got a kitchen from Santa. She was very excited and said 'I'm going to make some tea'."
Unquote

I definitely interpret that as Maddie being there on her own, the 'family' would otherwise have been mentioned, it being the first Christmas with the twins.
Imo it would be logical to say otherwise that the family came up for Christmas with a mention of the twins.

I have in the past read a reference to the fact that the first Christmas the twins were born Madeleine went to stay with her Grandmother to "keep her company" because it was her first Christmas alone following the death of her husband.

I cannot for the life of me remember wher I read it, but I'm certain it was written, because I was gob smacked. Firstly that a little one was sent away for Christmas, a first family Christmas with siblings, secondly that the mentality was there to suggest a tot of that age would keep an adult company and thirdly that the whole family would not go up or indeed have Grandmother to stay with thm

There was no ambiguity in the way it was phrased, keep her company was what was stated. I wish I could find it again.

by whatliesbehindthesofa 17.02.14 9:57

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Eileen McCann gave an interview in which she said that Madeleine had spent Christmas 2005 with her. I took this to mean that she was there with the rest of her family but others took it literally to mean that she was there on her own.

If I can find the interview I'll post it.

I definitely don't think there's proof that she was there on her own.

P.S. Found it quickly. http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/2009/12/madeleine-mccann-christmas-appeal-from.html

Sorry Anna, I don't agree with your interpretation of Eileen's words! All she meant from the way I read them is that the McCanns were there for Christmas 2005 but next time they came for new year instead.

I agree with your interpretation. The spoken word is much less precise than the written word. I can't find anything in her words that indicates that Madeleine was there by herself.

by Guest 17.02.14 10:00

Thanks WLBTS.

It will be interesting if the other article that Sami mentions can be found as I agree that gives the opposite impression.

by whatliesbehindthesofa 17.02.14 10:14

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Thanks WLBTS.

It will be interesting if the other article that Sami mentions can be found as I agree that gives the opposite impression.

Indeed, I'll probably change my mind if we can find a source.

by Guest 17.02.14 11:59

Maybe JT burst into tears because she hoped that GM would "remember" which side of the street he was on during the reconstruction. And when he didn't she finally realised he was lying and what it was she had got herself involved in.

What was so important to GM that he insists he crossed the road to talk to JW?

On 10th May 2007 the British Liason Official handed a timeline to the PJ just prior to interviews on that date. This was described as being collectively prepared by the nine people of the group in question.
We must assume that GM participated in making and was in full in agreement with what was in that timeline as his name is on the top of the list.

"2115 JT leaves table and sees GM talking with fellow resident ("Jez" Wilkins) outside the patio gate of 5a."

GM does not mention the encounter with JW on this timeline.
And has no more to add about his journey after going to the toilet to urinate in 5a. He is mentioned again next and for the final time as a third party:

"2020 JT then returns to the restaurant, by which time GM had also returned."

However.. In his interview later on the SAME day (10th May 2007) at 3.20pm GM states:

"After leaving through the side gate, and while on his way to the secondary reception entrance, less than 10 metres from the gate, he saw “JEZ” walking up the street on the opposite pavement, bringing with him a baby buggy with his youngest child. He crossed the road in JEZ's direction who was walking up on the right-hand side, in the ascending direction, both having chatted for 3 to 4 minutes, about tennis, holidays and children."

JW is quite definate that he crossed the street to talk to GM:
"When I left the street, I remember seeing Gerry on the other side of the same. I believe that there was some speculation in the press regarding the circumstances of this encounter. I remember that I crossed the street to talk to Gerry."

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id261.html

by whatliesbehindthesofa 17.02.14 12:16

This is one of the reasons why a real reconstruction has never taken place. What surprises me is that Gerry allowed this disagreement to appear in the mockumentary at all. Perhaps it was to demonstrate once and for all that Jane's statement was 'wrong', according to him. Perhaps Jane realised this and that's why she cried - that she'd been invited to be proven wrong. Perhaps Gerry had hoped that Jane would just tow the line, but she became emotional instead.

If I were a policeman, Jane Tanner would be my very first port of call.

by ultimaThule 17.02.14 12:18

Dee Coy wrote:Also, no wonder Gerry shut her up after the football comment, surely? Big slip-up there. No mention of any football on disppearance night in any other official McCann version. Examinition of that would completely screw-up all subsequent timelines and official accounts of what happened.

What possessed Jane to bring football into the already unequal equation? And why wasn't it edited out of the documentary? Perhaps because Jane was in floods immediately afterwards and refused to do a retake?

What appears to be absent from the PJ files as released to date is any statements from those residents of Luz who claim to have seen assorted members of the Tapas 9 late in the evening on various nights, and sans any kiddies in tow, in bars which show Sky TV sporting events and are situated considerably more distance from the 'back garden' setting in which they presumably dined earlier.

I suspect those statements, most probably together with a number of others which are yet to come into the public domain, are contained in a bulky folder which fell down the back of the filing cabinet and is yet to be discovered. yes

by ultimaThule 17.02.14 12:20

Woofer wrote:
I agree about Jane Tanner and wonder sometimes if she was entirely unaware of the scenario being enacted around her at 9.15pm.

See below for Kate genuinely bursting into tears at about 5.25 mins.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDLZh1cxdGc

To paraphrase Hislop if that's 'bursting into tears', I'm a banana. sarcastic

G&K are now an experienced double act who 'read' each other and step in to prevent their partner taking an unplanned pratfall.

On this occasion it was obvious Kate was well aware of Gerry grinning with joy at being given such an easy ride by an interviewer whose volubility made him appear he'd kissed the Blarney stone on more than one occasion.

At one point Gerry was barely able to contain his hilarity and the more he showed his delight at putting one over on the simple soul, the more Kate strove to compose her features into the all too familiar look of restrained anguish she practised so many times in front of a mirror until she had it down to a fine art.

I'm surprised that anyone can be fooled by a woman who can switch from 'beaming with delight' to 'haunted by grief' in an instant, but that's showbusiness and it's fitting that, having started with a paraphrase, I end this post with the one G&K have adopted as their signing off note, namely 'Leave 'em crying' as the more people feel sorry for them, the more it helps swell the lifestyle fund's coffers

by whatliesbehindthesofa 17.02.14 12:34

ultimaThule wrote:
What appears to absent from the PJ files as released to date is any statements from those residents of Luz who claim to have seen assorted members of the Tapas 9 late in the evening on various nights, and sans any kiddies in tow, in bars which show Sky TV sporting events and are situated considerably more distance from the 'back garden' setting in which they presumably dined earlier.

I suspect those statements, most probably together with a number of others which are yet to come into the public domain, are contained in a bulky folder which fell down the back of the filing cabinet and is yet to be discovered.

Yes, I've read posts that were written in the summer of 2007 - very early days before the PJ files were released - that claimed that the McCanns were in Chaplins at some point, and not the Tapas Bar. The same poster made claims about the things that Pamela Fenn heard which we now know to be accurate. Usually, I put posts like this in the 'internet myth' category when there's no confirming source, but given that the other claims that were made turned out to be correct I give the idea that the McCanns were in Chaplins some credence.

And if that were the case, then surely there would be *lots* of witnesses. Also, I disagree with a lot of textusa's theories, but the Tapas 'reservation sheets' do look suspicious to me. In my opinion, those sheets were faked up after the 3rd.

by Guest 17.02.14 13:34

And also in the GM 10th May 2007 statement:

"He then returned to the TAPAS, between 21h10 and 21h15, dinner having gone as normal. As the movement of people at the table was frequent, he does not know if, when he returned, anyone else was absent, namely JANE. At around 21h30 he drew KATE's attention to the fact that it was time for her to go to see the children, MATHEW having immediately volunteered to substitute her, given the fact that she was chatting. Three to four minutes later MATHEW returned, saying only "all is quiet" (SIC), he having entered through the back door, given that he did not have the key and it was usual for them to enter in that way.

After MATHEW arrived and before KATE left, he does not recall if anyone else was absent, although it was very probable that such had happened. He thinks that, on that night, none of the adults nor children were ill. Asked, he mentions that the daughter of RUSSEL and FIONA would have been ill on Tuesday.

Half and hour later, without anything to remark, it being 22h03, he again alerted KATE that it was time to check the children."

So he doesn't recall Jane coming back to the table. ROB going to check with MO. ROB staying in his apartment with his ill daughter and not returning to the table. Jane leaving the table to relieve ROB. ROB coming back to the table for his big juicy steak. And gets confused thinking that ROB and FP have a daughter together.
Clearly this was a man who was very distracted that evening, or wasn't there at all.