Yesterday we were asked to consider the 'major discrepancy' between what Kate McCann wrote in her book about the curtains in Apartment 5A (closed) and what she apparently said about them in her statement to the police (open).
What then do Amaral supporters make of the folowing 'major discrepancy' concerning the confrontation of Murat by various of the McCann friends?
From his book:
On July 11th at 10am, a confrontation is organised between the witnesses - Rachael Mampilly, Fiona Payne and Russell O'Brien - and Robert Murat. Nothing new comes out of it.
From an interview with Amaral in 2010:
Tanner was questioned in the Maddie process yes, as a witness. First she said she saw Murat at the scene, recognized him by the way he walked. And then she said other things, later on. Besides there was a diligence in which she said that yes, it was him, and there were later recognitions and a witness confrontation carried out between them, with Murat, in which they said it was him.
Who are they?
Those who I remember, besides Jane Tanner, were her husband and the wife of Oldfield. They faced a confrontation with Mr Murat.
So - was Tanner at the confrontation or not? The photos taken at the time seem to suggest that she was not part of the group. Has Amaral ever explained this 'major' discrepancy to the public? As far as I know he has not... :-)
Is Amaral allowed to get details wrong, unlike Kate McCann who must remember every single detail perfectly and never contradict herself? Or is Amaral right even when he is apparently contradicting himself? Over to you, McCann "sceptics"...