How could Jez and Gerry not see Jane?

[G-Unit]

The pavement is 2 metres wide at the alleyway and almost 2 metres wide elsewhere on that stretch.

I accidentally posted this on another thread that required a similar responce, so herewith in the correct thread:

it is very easy to see how it could have happened and I haven't even factored in the psychological reasons for missing things as mentioned earlier on, I think, this thread


Here goes:

1)  From The Carpenters statements we know that there were a number of vehicles parked to the north of the Tapas Reception

2)  We have worked out in previous threads from statements that Gerry was standing on the kerb of the western pavement of Rua Dr Francisco G Martins ... more or less at the entrance to the alleyway that runs between block 5 and the Tapas area.  He was looking away from anyone walking up the pavement behind him.

3)  Jez was standing in the road close to where it meets the kerb, opposite to Gerry. Little traffic there but for safeties sake with his little one in the pushchair, he presumably tucked in close to a parked vehicle .... blocking a good deal of his vision, left and right

4)  Jane passes.  Somewhere in the statements (I think) she has made it plain that she doesn't care for Gerry too much.  Because Gerry is at the entrance to the alleyway and he is right on the kerb, she circles round him a good metre or so behind and as quietly as is possible*** and quietly continues up the road.  It is between street lamps and quite dark.   

Jane is not looking her usual attractive self, dressed in an overwhelmingly large, almost certainly dark parka / fleece belonging to Russell who is, I think, about 6'4" tall.  She was cold.   An amorphous shape and quite possibly with a hood up.
Please correct me if I am wrong on the height of Russell..





She is the partner to Russell, a consultant, and also has a good position herself, so not short of money.  *** Her so called flip-flops could be very expensive evening sandals which do not SLAP on the ground, but are like ordinary sandals sound wise.   The sound is not extra ordinary in any way. 

Gerry has his back to her, he does not notice her.

Jez has a very small window to see her, because of parked vehicles and also Gerrys large frame in front of him ... and is in any case talking lovingly about his little one looking down at him.  He doesn't know Jane and frankly there was nothing about her in Russells parka to make him notice her.  He doesn't notice her.  She doesn't even register in his brain.


About three years ago Heriberto Janosch gave a very good scientific analysis of ones field of vision.  It was surprisingly narrow

She was out of Gerrys field of Vision all the time.  Out of Jezes almost all the time, hidden by vehicles as she walked up and passed by .... and then completely out of their Field of Vision as she walked on up the hill.
.

Tannerman was beyond either mans 'Field of Vision'


This is just a hypothesis but all the facts except maybe the closeness of the parked cars and the quality of the shoes is in verifyable from various statements.  It is entirely feasible

They all seemed to have eye problems. Jane didn't see any parked cars, she saw the two men immediately on exiting the Tapas;

4078    “Okay.  So when did you first notice Gerry standing there?”
Reply    “I would have probably noticed him as soon as I came, I mean, I don’t, this is not, I don’t think that distance is probably as far as that, you come out and he was, they were sort of, so almost, I’d probably say almost straight away.

4078    “Were there any cars around there?”
Reply    “Erm, umm, no, I don’t know.  I don’t remember.  I don’t remember walking past any going up here and I think I would have probably, if there had been I would have realised,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

[Robittybob1]

Would you kindly give us some examples?

It is just a matter of googling Bridget O'donnell Mccann and reading up what she has written about her experiences in PDL. I'll do it later.

[sadie]

jez gave another statement that showed that he and Gerry stood talking on the corner of the alleyway where Jane Tanner indicated very clearly in the Mccann video.

He also drew a map showing that they stood talking on the alleyway corner NOT by the steps up.


This has all been gone over very thoroughly before.  The Gerry/Jez chat was NOT at the steps but at the alleyway corner.

Further more as part of his statement, he drew this plans to the place where they chatted.  It is NOT at the gate, or the steps, but on the ALLEYWAY CORNER.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/9of8-ecf89375_small.gif



Sorry, I dont know how to make it bigger BUT LOOK carefully ROB.  You will see the cross that Jez put on the map he drew.  It is right by the alleyway, same as Jane said.


Additionally to this he made a seperate statement where he described coming from the eastern side of Rua dr Francisco G Martins by the little car park opposite the Tapas reception and as he did seeing Gerry coming down the stairs thru the gate.  Sorry but I haven't the time nor energy to YET AGAIN find this and post it, but it is there and has been witnessed by most on this forum ... even if they are in denial and chose to NOT remember it  %&5%£

If they met half way that would be as Jane said and as he located on  his map.

That is on the corner of the alleyway

[Alfie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atfDV7imHHY

Watch Jane very plainly indicating where Gerry and Jez were chatting ... on the alleyway corner.  She actually walks down to show the exact spot.

@ 10.00 on the video

Thanks for posting that clip Sadie.  It clearly shows that whichever side of the road Gerry had been standing he would have been seen by anyone who happened to be out on the balconies on the apartment at the top of the road, so Faithlilly's mooted motivation for Gerry supposely changing his story can be ruled out.  It was a nonsensical motive put forward by Faithlilly even before seeing this clip, but she's going to have to come up with another reason for this supposed collusion and deception.

[Alfie]

It is just a matter of googling Bridget O'donnell Mccann and reading up what she has written about her experiences in PDL. I'll do it later.

I have already done that and can find nothing negative she has said about Gerry.

[Robittybob1]

I have already done that and can find nothing negative she has said about Gerry.

Maybe the articles have been removed from the internet but they were there some months back. You'll be asleep but I'm working so it will be later OK.  I'll recheck the net.

[Brietta]

They all seemed to have eye problems. Jane didn't see any parked cars, she saw the two men immediately on exiting the Tapas;

4078    “Okay.  So when did you first notice Gerry standing there?”
Reply    “I would have probably noticed him as soon as I came, I mean, I don’t, this is not, I don’t think that distance is probably as far as that, you come out and he was, they were sort of, so almost, I’d probably say almost straight away.

4078    “Were there any cars around there?”
Reply    “Erm, umm, no, I don’t know.  I don’t remember.  I don’t remember walking past any going up here and I think I would have probably, if there had been I would have realised,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

In other words ... not at or near the gate to apartment five but at a far closer point to the tapas entrance which was at the wide entrance to the back lane.
Which is very likely why she was able to pass by totally unobserved by two people who were engrossed in speaking to each other.

[faithlilly]

You asked me if the police would view JT / Jez statements as more credible than Gerry's.  Well I don't know about ALL polcemen but I do know the view of one of them.  Goncalo Amaral's view was "Jane Tanner is not credible: she identifies and recognizes different people".   So he clearly had little belief in her credibility as a witness.

Now how about you answer any of my questions or are you just going to be rude and patronizing in reply instead?

Who do you think a jury would believe?

[sadie]

Who do you think a jury would believe?

Irelevant faith

Soz

[faithlilly]

Thanks for posting that clip Sadie.  It clearly shows that whichever side of the road Gerry had been standing he would have been seen by anyone who happened to be out on the balconies on the apartment at the top of the road, so Faithlilly's mooted motivation for Gerry supposely changing his story can be ruled out.  It was a nonsensical motive put forward by Faithlilly even before seeing this clip, but she's going to have to come up with another reason for this supposed collusion and deception.

And I stand by my theory. The issue is not wether anyone looking from either side of the road could see Jez and Gerry but if they did and didn't see Jane the ' I was standing on the other side of the road and didn't see her gov' defence could be brought into play. It was w risky tactic as he knew both Tanner and Jez would have put the talk on the opposite side of the road but I'm sure he thought he could brazen it out as he did with Tanner in 'Madeleine Was Here'.

[pathfinder73]

Further more as part of his statement, he drew this plans to the place where they chatted.  It is NOT at the gate, or the steps, but on the ALLEYWAY CORNER.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P2/9of8-ecf89375_small.gif



Sorry, I dont know how to make it bigger BUT LOOK carefully ROB.  You will see the cross that Jez put on the map he drew.  It is right by the alleyway, same as Jane said.


Additionally to this he made a seperate statement where he described coming from the eastern side of Rua dr Francisco G Martins by the little car park opposite the Tapas reception and as he did seeing Gerry coming down the stairs thru the gate.  Sorry but I haven't the time nor energy to YET AGAIN find this and post it, but it is there and has been witnessed by most on this forum ... even if they are in denial and chose to NOT remember it  %&5%£

If they met half way that would be as Jane said and as he located on  his map.

That is on the corner of the alleyway

If Jez was by the lane/alley he would have said that and not the stairs / gate.

"I met him near the stairs of a ground floor. There was a gate leading up to some stairs. I was pretty certain that he had left the apartment. We spoke for a few minutes. He said you're on walking duty. I said I was staying in and [ censored word ] and cons and what to do with the children." (7 May 2007)

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm

[faithlilly]

If Jez was by the lane/alley he would have said that and not the stairs / gate.

"I met him near the stairs of a ground floor. There was a gate leading up to some stairs. I was pretty certain that he had left the apartment. We spoke for a few minutes. He said you're on walking duty. I said I was staying in and [ censored word ] and cons and what to do with the children." (7 May 2007)

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm

Precisely PF.

[Brietta]

And I stand by my theory. The issue is not wether anyone looking from either side of the road could see Jez and Gerry but if they did and didn't see Jane the ' I was standing on the other side of the road and didn't see her gov' defence could be brought into play. It was w risky tactic as he knew both Tanner and Jez would have put the talk on the opposite side of the road but I'm sure he thought he could brazen it out as he did with Tanner in 'Madeleine Was Here'.

As was said in the video clip ... it mattered nothing where on the road the two men were standing ... they were not the witnesses.

The only person in that triad who witnessed anything at all was Jane Tanner.

• Jane was the person who witnessed a man coming from the direction of block 5, carrying a child
• at the time of her sighting, Jane did not know that later that night Madeleine's mother would find her missing from her bed

Therefore the only person whose testimony of events on the street that night is of relevance is Jane Tanner. All else is obfuscation and an irrelevance which perhaps had the effect it was designed to have.  Particularly when the child carrier was relegated for years and failed to become even a bit player in the narrative for those who prefer that such an individual didn't exist.

[faithlilly]

As was said in the video clip ... it mattered nothing where on the road the two men were standing ... they were not the witnesses.

The only person in that triad who witnessed anything at all was Jane Tanner.

• Jane was the person who witnessed a man coming from the direction of block 5, carrying a child
• at the time of her sighting, Jane did not know that later that night Madeleine's mother would find her missing from her bed

Therefore the only person whose testimony of events on the street that night is of relevance is Jane Tanner. All else is obfuscation and an irrelevance which perhaps had the effect it was designed to have.  Particularly when the child carrier was relegated for years and failed to become even a bit player in the narrative for those who prefer that such an individual didn't exist.

You seem to have a rather bad memory Brietta so let me refresh it for you. Redwood and the McCann's own investigators dismissed Tanner's sighting, Redwood claiming the probable carrier had made himself known to OG so whatever else Edgar was correct about  he certainly wasn't right about the importance of Tanner's sighting.

[John]

How is this explained?

You could also ask the question as to why Gerry apparently couldn't even recall which side of the road he was on.