The Find Madeleine website is updated re Tannerman

[Redblossom]

Considering that an investigation was only open in, what? November? it's early days for the honeymoon to be over already.

My faith in Scotland yard is increasing by the day.

July it was when they made it an investigation.....ditto re SY!

[icabodcrane]

 ...  and neither did they 'suppress' the Efit.

So when did you first see this Efit that the McCanns had for six years   ?

[Silkywhiskers]

So when did you first see this Efit that the McCanns had for six years   ?

Indeed.

Tannerman still features prominently on their website -

http://www.findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html

Even though we now KNOW he's not involved.

Why is this?

Where is the write up about the REAL efits?

[icabodcrane]

Indeed.

Tannerman still features prominently on their website -

http://www.findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html

Even though we now KNOW he's not involved.

Why is this?

Where is the write up about the REAL efits?

It really is baffling

The McCann's official website devotes a page to those people who's identification is deemed  "IMPORTANT"

Those people are   :

The man Jane Tanner saw   (  despite Scotland Yard's stated position  ) 

The spotty man

The Victoria Beckam lookalike

Each of their Efits are accompanied by a descriptive passage of  where and when they were spotted, and in what way their behaviour was questionable

...   and where is the Smith family efit  ?   ( the one Scotland Yard think is crucial  ) 

Relegated to a  general  'Rogues' Gallery'   ...  with no more than a reference number 

Like I say,  baffling   

[Redblossom]

It really is baffling

The McCann's official website devotes a page to those people who's identification is deemed  "IMPORTANT"

Those people are   :

The man Jane Tanner saw   (  despite Scotland Yard's stated position  ) 

The spotty man

The Victoria Beckam lookalike

Each of their Efits are accompanied by a descriptive passage of  where and when they were spotted, and in what way their behaviour was questionable

...   and where is the Smith family efit  ?   ( the one Scotland Yard think is crucial  ) 

Relegated to a  general  'Rogues' Gallery'   ...  with no more than a reference number 

Like I say,  baffling

Yes, seeing as none of  the other rogues were seen ON THE NIGHT by several carrying a approx 4 yr old blonde girl in pyjamas

I posted a video the other day where Jim Gamble (will edit and post it in a sec) was comenting on Crimewatch and he said, because all attention was put onTannerman and 9.15 all these years and NOT on Smithman at 10pm, no one was racking their brains to remember if they had seen him....how much more confirmation does anyone need the sighting was hardly publicised at all bar a few words in lip service by the Mccanns very late in the day to that one..AND thry had the efits since late 2008

And yea, SilkyW, no emphasis put on Smithman on the official MM website at all
Eta

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2653.0

Last video on this thread from around 3.15 on

[Silkywhiskers]

Yes, seeing as none of  the other rogues were seen ON THE NIGHT by several carrying a approx 4 yr old blonde girl in pyjamas

I posted a video the other day where Jim Gamble (will edit and post it in a sec) was comenting on Crimewatch and he said, because all attention was put onTannerman and 9.15 all these years and NOT on Smithman at 10pm, no one was racking their brains to remember if they had seen him....how much more confirmation does anyone need the sighting was hardly publicised at all bar a few words in lip service by the Mccanns very late in the day to that one..AND thry had the efits since late 2008

And yea, SilkyW, no emphasis put on Smithman on the official MM website at all
Eta

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2653.0

Last video on this thread from around 3.15 on

And how do Team McCann explain this?

Oh yes, SY is WRONG.

Of course.

[Sherlock Holmes]

It is astonishing.

After all these years pressuring for an official investigation, not long after it begins the McCanns make it plain that they do not like the way it is turning.

If they do not agree with SY's lines of inquiry, why not keep that to themselves?

[Sherlock Holmes]

It really is baffling

The McCann's official website devotes a page to those people who's identification is deemed  "IMPORTANT"

Those people are   :

The man Jane Tanner saw   (  despite Scotland Yard's stated position  ) 

The spotty man

The Victoria Beckam lookalike

Each of their Efits are accompanied by a descriptive passage of  where and when they were spotted, and in what way their behaviour was questionable

...   and where is the Smith family efit  ?   ( the one Scotland Yard think is crucial  ) 

Relegated to a  general  'Rogues' Gallery'   ...  with no more than a reference number 

Like I say,  baffling

Surely these 'suspects' represent the narrative in which the McCanns find most comfort (relative to all the other possibilities).

Tannerman - their good friend Jane was correct in what they saw; their claims of an abduction are vindicated.
Beckhamwoman: A mother figure is involved, therefore Madeleine is with a warm and loving family.
Spottyman: Assistant to the loving Beckhamwoman.

[Silkywhiskers]

It is astonishing.

After all these years pressuring for an official investigation, not long after it begins the McCanns make it plain that they do not like the way it is turning.

If they do not agree with SY's lines of inquiry, why not keep that to themselves?

Because they are Kate and Gerry.

Publicity loving (unless it's negative), media savvy, they always assume everyone wants to hear their opinion.  Blogs and books and interviews confirm that.

Indeed, the British media has traditionally given them a platform to air their displeasures openly, and a sympathetic slant to even their most narcissistic displays.

Like this one.

[a.baker]

And wasn't the purpose of that Crimewatch episode so that Redwood could announce the 'revelation' that the tanner sighting was an innocent holiday maker? And that they felt it was the Smith sighting that was crucial to the investigation? The McCanns appear to not want to give any credence at all to the Smith sighting. Now why would that be when they profess to 'leave no stone unturned' in the search for their daughter? This fact alone should sound some very loud alarm bells. For how much longer are SY going to keep ignoring it in favour of gypsies/disgruntled ex OC employees/burglars etc etc

[peter claridge]

Tannerman and Crecheman are similar in many ways, the most notable being that they are both complete fabrications!

[Estuarine]

Tannerman and Crecheman are similar in many ways, the most notable being that they are both complete fabrications!

 

[Benice]

I don't see what the problem is.      Even if Crecheman is an innocent tourist, he is still part of this case - and any information about him can only be helpful to SY IMO

It could be that someone saw him carrying his child after he left  the creche - and so thought nothing more about it at the time.     But surely any info no matter how small - which can confirm  times and places would be helpful.   

Additional info. as a result of the piccie could also mean that SY would be in a position to state with total certainty that Crecheman was the man JT saw  instead of being 'almost certain'.

I doubt very much whether the McCanns would put anything on their FB page regarding this - without first discussing it with SY.

[ferryman]

So when did you first see this Efit that the McCanns had for six years   ?

The e-fit was in the possession of both British and Portuguese police for several years before its public release on the crimewatch programme.

[AnneGuedes]

The e-fit was in the possession of both British and Portuguese police for several years before its public release on the crimewatch programme.