Author Topic: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?  (Read 10391 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #30 on: January 30, 2021, 12:08:03 PM »
Yes, 100% open minded. There is no doubt in my mind that Madeleine could have been abducted by a stranger. I have never intimated on here or anywhere else that it wasn’t possible.
Good to know.
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #31 on: January 30, 2021, 12:12:17 PM »
It's the police's job to interview potential suspects and rule out or rule in.  It's a very specific description and IMO if it had been a local on his way to work or one of the holiday makers that looks vaguely like the efit then IMO it should have been fairly easy for the police to do so.  It's clear to me that this individual has never been identified and as such there may still be an important lead.  We just don't know either way, so trying to dismiss the sighting on here as unimportant because the girl was just being a bit giddy or because it was "probably a man waiting for a lift" is a bit short-sighted, IMO.

I am not trying to dismiss the sighting as unimportant only stating that to me he has always resembled Mr Berry and you are correct he has never been publicly identified so remains a person of interest.

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #32 on: January 30, 2021, 12:13:52 PM »
Good to know.

How so? What does it matter to you if I think its possible that a stranger abducted Madeleine?

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #33 on: January 30, 2021, 01:15:26 PM »
How so? What does it matter to you if I think its possible that a stranger abducted Madeleine?
It doesn't matter at all you're right.
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline sadie

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #34 on: January 30, 2021, 06:14:33 PM »
Somewhere, Misty, I feel sure that TS thought that he was 1.8 metres tall = 6 feet approx.   I wonder where I saw that?  It was from a webpage identified here, a few days ago, IIRC    Was it posted by you Rob? 

I agree wholeheartedly the sighting along with Mrs Tranmers is still of importance to the investigation. Very much so.

Hi Misty, the 1.8 metres was in the opening post by faith.

Offline sadie

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #35 on: January 30, 2021, 06:19:39 PM »
Somewhere, Misty, I feel sure that TS thought that he was 1.8 metres tall = 6 feet approx.   I wonder where I saw that?  It was from a webpage identified here, a few days ago, IIRC    Was it posted by you Rob? 

I agree wholeheartedly the sighting along with Mrs Tranmers is still of importance to the investigation. Very much so.

I have found the 1.8 metres.  It was in the opening post to this thread by faithlilly

Quote
Tasmin’s description certainly doesn’t sound like Brueckner and she certainly doesn’t say that the man she saw had a pockmarked face.

‘Concerning the individual, she describes him as being: Caucasian race, light skin, so he wasn't Portuguese, but could be British, according to her criteria. Approximately 180 cm tall, thin complexion, 30/35 years of age. Short hair, like shaved with 1 cm of length and fair, but she isn't sure if it was blonde because the sun was reflecting, and made perception more difficult. She didn't see the eyes because he wore dark glasses of black colour, with a structure of mass, a thick frame. He had a large forehead. Nose of normal size, a bit pointy and sharp. Large ears, close against the head. Mouth with thin lips, she didn't see his teeth. Chin pointing up, which stood out on a face that she describes as sharp. No beard, no moustache, a clean shave. No other special signs, apart from some small pimples on the face as a result of shaving. He looked ugly, even 'disgusting'.’

Offline sadie

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #36 on: January 30, 2021, 07:38:58 PM »

Faiths description sounds very like Brueckner to me.  I don't know where she got it from

Faiths quote
Quote
Tasmin’s description certainly doesn’t sound like Brueckner and she certainly doesn’t say that the man she saw had a pockmarked face.

‘Concerning the individual, she describes him as being: Caucasian race, light skin, so he wasn't Portuguese, but could be British, according to her criteria. Approximately 180 cm tall, thin complexion, 30/35 years of age. Short hair, like shaved with 1 cm of length and fair, but she isn't sure if it was blonde because the sun was reflecting, and made perception more difficult. She didn't see the eyes because he wore dark glasses of black colour, with a structure of mass, a thick frame. He had a large forehead. Nose of normal size, a bit pointy and sharp. Large ears, close against the head. Mouth with thin lips, she didn't see his teeth. Chin pointing up, which stood out on a face that she describes as sharp. No beard, no moustache, a clean shave. No other special signs, apart from some small pimples on the face as a result of shaving. He looked ugly, even 'disgusting'.’

1.  180cm tall = approx. 6 feet tall
2.  30/35 years old
3.  Light skin, I don't KNOW about this but people with facial skin problems often keep out of the sun, to prevent flair ups.
4.  Short hair, like shaved with 1 cm of length and fair, but she isn't sure if it was blonde.  She obviously thought that it might be fair. 
5.  He had a large forehead (just like CB's!)
6.  Normal sized nose (a bit pointy and sharp)
7.  Large ears close to the head
8.  Thin lips
9.  Clean shaven
10.  Some small pimples on the face.
11.  Ugly, even disgusting
12.  Chin sticking out

Apart from nos.12 and 11 this sounds remarkably like CB, and a few pimples could be the reason that she thought him ugly and disgusting.  Kids see thing differently from adults

How remarkably observant Tasmin was.

Carole Tranmers description matched Tasmins in a number of ways except for the height, but caroles view was from pretty much above, so there would be foreshortening, which could cause the height to be slightly off.

I am inclined to think that Tasmins man is the same man as Caroles.    And they very largely sound rather like CB.    But we don't know for sure.      Apartment 5A was really being given the going over, wasn't it.


Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #37 on: January 30, 2021, 09:13:36 PM »
Why does he need to be a local?
Why would he be waiting for a lift to work if he wasn’t a local?
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline faithlilly

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #38 on: January 30, 2021, 09:28:12 PM »
Why would he be waiting for a lift to work if he wasn’t a local?

The lift to work is just one scenario...perhaps he was staying at his girlfriend’s house and that’s why he needed a lift....or he was a holidaymaker waiting for a taxi...or a holidaymaker waiting for his wife etc, etc, etc.

How long after Tasmin gave her statement was her description made public and where? Two, four, ten years and on British television, on Portuguese television...in only English speaking media? The answer to those questions  may explain why the person she saw hasn’t come forward.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #39 on: January 30, 2021, 09:33:12 PM »
The lift to work is just one scenario...perhaps he was staying at his girlfriend’s house and that’s why he needed a lift....or he was a holidaymaker waiting for a taxi...or a holidaymaker waiting for his wife etc, etc, etc.

How long after Tasmin gave her statement was her description made public and where? Two, four, ten years and on British television, on Portuguese television...in only English speaking media? The answer to those questions  may explain why the person she saw hasn’t come forward.
From the way he was dressed he didn’t sound like someone on holiday en route to the pool or the beach, but I guess we will never know whether the sighting was something or nothing.  Pointless speculating any further imo.
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline faithlilly

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #40 on: January 30, 2021, 09:38:15 PM »
From the way he was dressed he didn’t sound like someone on holiday en route to the pool or the beach, but I guess we will never know whether the sighting was something or nothing.  Pointless speculating any further imo.

Maybe he was going shopping in Lagos and he was dressed for shopping?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #41 on: January 30, 2021, 11:58:16 PM »
So basically what you seem to be saying is that this sighting was rightly ignored by the police because “common sense” tells us he was probably not Madeleine’s abductor, right?
« Last Edit: February 02, 2021, 09:29:08 AM by John »
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline faithlilly

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #42 on: January 31, 2021, 12:03:13 AM »
So basically what you seem to be saying is that this sighting was rightly ignored by the police because “common sense” tells us he was probably not Madeleine’s abductor, right?

Was it ignored by the police?

That her statement was taken just days after the disappearance seems to suggest otherwise and if you look through the files there are several mentions of her sighting and the activity surrounding it.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2021, 09:29:26 AM by John »
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline misty

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #43 on: January 31, 2021, 12:58:56 AM »
I have found the 1.8 metres.  It was in the opening post to this thread by faithlilly

Yes, you're right. Quite why I thought 5.9 feet equated to 5'9" I don't know.
Anyway, here's a photo of CB taken approx. 5 weeks before Madeleine disappeared.

Offline sadie

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #44 on: January 31, 2021, 03:17:06 AM »
Yes, you're right. Quite why I thought 5.9 feet equated to 5'9" I don't know.
Anyway, here's a photo of CB taken approx. 5 weeks before Madeleine disappeared.

Thank you for the photo Misty.  I was hoping that he would have the almost shaven, !cm long hair, as mentioned by both Tasmin and Carole T.

But with 5 weeks to go before the abduction, who knows how long his hair might have been then , although it cant have been very long.  I think that this rules him out as Tannerman

But Tannerman was carrying the ?Madeleines head on his left shoulder, which indicates that there was an accomplice who ?climbed in to lift Madeleine.   The only person that I think was capable of climbing in was CB; he was like a circus act with his climbing and entering abilities.   That window was very narrow.   I think they call such people cat burglars..    If there was an accomplice that lifted Madeleine after climbing in, then that person could easily have been CB, but we really do not know, do we?

Personally I believe that entry and exit were via the front door.  I don't think anyone but athletic slim cat burglar CB could have entered via the narrow window, but why weren't there fibres and finger prints and footprints on the cill?  .


 The long and short of this is