The tapas group and the 'reconstitution' that was never to take place.

[ferryman]

Quote from: ferryman on July 07, 2015, 10:54:02 PM
That remains to be demonstrated;

No it doesn't.

The so-called "reconstitution" was (rightly!) seen through as a farce.


----------

Quote from: mercury on July 08, 2015, 10:16:06 PM
Of course it was a farce. Never in the history of crime have witnesses who have said they would do anything at all go help, refuse to do so unless their conditions were first met. I would like to see them try that little trick with the British police.

The embarrassing irony, after some were weeping and wailing how a reconstruction would be a horror for them to relive, went in a year later to say YES to the Mccanns for their own "reconstruction" -  a farce if there ever was. misrepresenting facts and witness statements and all sorts.

----------
QUOTE BY FERRYMAN:

The farce was the suggestion that such a ridiculous notion (as a "reconstitution") was ever mooted in the first place ...

-----


Seeing  as our discussion was cut short by the Mods on the Amaral and the Dogs thread, Im carrying it on here


Now, by the above, do you think both Rebelo , the new investigator after Amafal was booted off the case, and the Public Prosecutor who criticised the Tapas group, were wrong? But YOU are right? Dont you realise all these refusals to cooperate with the police are one of the main reasons the Mccanns and some of their friends are suspected/maligned? In your words?

Think doesn't enter into it.

Perhaps Portuguese law will do the decent think and consign (Portuguese style!) "reconstitutions" to the history book of Portuguese law.

We can but hope ...

[pathfinder73]

Think doesn't enter into it.

Perhaps Portuguese law will do the decent think and consign (Portuguese style!) "reconstitutions" to the history book of Portuguese law.

We can but hope ...

Still an unsolved case Ferryman if you hadn't noticed so they can get back and help to do a reconstruction and they can account for all their time away from the table not just some. It's not like they will ever forget that night and have re-played it hundreds of times in their minds searching for answers. It only takes 45 seconds to walk to the patio door. I want realism not fantasy.

[Lace]

Well at least Gerry's check would have come before the fiasco when the flip floppin ninja sneaked past them both.

Are you suggesting Jane Tanner .... to the police?

[Benice]

Still an unsolved case Ferryman if you hadn't noticed so they can get back and help to do a reconstruction and they can account for all their time away from the table not just some. It's not like they will ever forget that night and have re-played it hundreds of times in their minds searching for answers. It only takes 45 seconds to walk to the patio door. I want realism not fantasy.

Of course they will never forget that night.  However that does not mean they should be expected to remember down to the last minute the exact time they made each and every move  - particularly as they had no reason at the time to place any importance at all on the times they did anything. 

To successfully recreate their movements of a year previous - then knowing the precise times they did different things is absolute crucial - but it is simply not humanly possible for one person to do that - let alone 10 of them.

If you really believe a recon would solve anything - then perhaps you could give us your idea of how it would be carried out?   IIRC the plan was to cover the hours between 5.30 and 11.00p.m.

Lots of questions come to mind.  For instance:

Were the present occupants of the apartment they used a year previous going to be asked to leave for the day?

How were they going to guarantee identical weather conditions prevailed?

Also

PJ to Jez Wilkins.   ''We would like you to set out on your walk at the same time you did a year ago'

JW to PJ     -   But I don't know the exact time, I can only guess.  What if I go at the wrong time and don't meet Gerry'?  What then - do I go again at a different time or what?

PJ to Jez Wilkins..........................................................??     

[pathfinder73]

Are you suggesting Jane Tanner... to the police?

A reconstruction would prove if it was possible for her to pass both of them without being seen. One witness thinks not.

I believe that it would have been possible to see if an individual was near but evidently, the greater the distance, the harder the difficulty in seeing. I would say that when I spoke with Gerry it was possible to recognize someone I knew who was passing on foot at the crossing at the top of the hill or to describe approximately someone unknown from that distance.

Q. Relative to whether I know Jane Tanner;
Now I know her name, description of the clothes and photos which I have seen in the press. At that time I knew of her as a member of the group but did not know her name. I do not remember having seen her when I spoke with Gerry, but I believe I saw her when I first ventured out. She was stopped on the street in front of one of the group's apartments when I passed her down towards the exit to my apartment. I do not know if it was her apartment or not. I remember that she was wearing the colour purple.

Q. Relative to the passerby/transient:
I can affirm that it was a quiet street and it was very unlikely that someone could have passed by me in this way but this as an assumption and I do not remember anything having happened.

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

[pathfinder73]

Of course they will never forget that night.  However that does not mean they should be expected to remember down to the last minute the exact time they made each and every move  - particularly as they had no reason at the time to place any importance at all on the times they did anything. 

To successfully recreate their movements of a year previous - then knowing the precise times they did different things is absolute crucial - but it is simply not humanly possible for one person to do that - let alone 10 of them.

If you really believe a recon would solve anything - then perhaps you could give us your idea of how it would be carried out?   IIRC the plan was to cover the hours between 5.30 and 11.00p.m.

Lots of questions come to mind.  For instance:

Were the present occupants of the apartment they used a year previous going to be asked to leave for the day?

How were they going to guarantee identical weather conditions prevailed?

Also

PJ to Jez Wilkins.   ''We would like you to set out on your walk at the same time you did a year ago'

JW to PJ     -   But I don't know the exact time, I can only guess.  What if I go at the wrong time and don't meet Gerry'?  What then - do I go again at a different time or what?

PJ to Jez Wilkins..........................................................??     

Big discrepancy in time. Nearly 15 minutes to do a check. Jane said he was gone a long time before she left the table and saw them chatting. They both said it was only a brief chat. 45 seconds to get to the patio door. A few minutes inside the apartment. Do the maths it doesn't add up. A reconstruction would address this important issue. Actually it's crucial in my theory. Means, opportunity and motive have to be investigated or your not doing your job properly.

The conversation with Gerry lasted for about three minutes during which Gerry was chatty and in his normal self. Jeremy then made his way back to his apartment.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm

[Benice]

A reconstruction would prove if it was possible for her to pass both of them without being seen. One witness thinks not.

I believe that it would have been possible to see if an individual was near but evidently, the greater the distance, the harder the difficulty in seeing. I would say that when I spoke with Gerry it was possible to recognize someone I knew who was passing on foot at the crossing at the top of the hill or to describe approximately someone unknown from that distance.

Q. Relative to whether I know Jane Tanner;
Now I know her name, description of the clothes and photos which I have seen in the press. At that time I knew of her as a member of the group but did not know her name. I do not remember having seen her when I spoke with Gerry, but I believe I saw her when I first ventured out. She was stopped on the street in front of one of the group's apartments when I passed her down towards the exit to my apartment. I do not know if it was her apartment or not. I remember that she was wearing the colour purple.

Q. Relative to the passerby/transient:
I can affirm that it was a quiet street and it was very unlikely that someone could have passed by me in this way but this as an assumption and I do not remember anything having happened.

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

No it wouldn't prove that IMO.       It took seconds for JT to pass them by.    If one had his back to her and the other was looking in a different direction and they were deep in conversaton - then it is perfectly possible they missed her.

Unfortunately there is no way I can prove it, but I know it is possible from personal experience.   My grandson sat in his car - parked at the curb, with the door wide open -  talking to me.  I was standing at my gate about 2/3 metres away saying goodbye to him.        As he leaned out to close his door he dropped his keys and in the time it took him to retrieve them and look up again  - a jogger passed between us.   

When I commented on the jogger's hilarious shorts - grandson said.... ''what shorts''.  He had no idea that anyone had just passed within a few feet of him.   In the meantime the jogger had disappeared round a corner.

And this was in broad daylight.

[pathfinder73]

No it wouldn't prove that IMO.       It took seconds for JT to pass them by.    If one had his back to her and the other was looking in a different direction and they were deep in conversaton - then it is perfectly possible they missed her.

Unfortunately there is no way I can prove it, but I know it is possible from personal experience.   My grandson sat in his car - parked at the curb, with the door wide open -  talking to me.  I was standing at my gate about 2/3 metres away saying goodbye to him.        As he leaned out to close his door he dropped his keys and in the time it took him to retrieve them and look up again  - a jogger passed between us.   

When I commented on the jogger's hilarious shorts - grandson said.... ''what shorts''.  He had no idea that anyone had just passed within a few feet of him.   In the meantime the jogger had disappeared round a corner.

And this was in broad daylight.

Two witnesses who both claim they didn't see her. Nobody dropped keys (Gerry later said he didn't have his on him  ). Here's the reconstruction setting - source TOTL book

[Benice]

Big discrepancy in time. Nearly 15 minutes to do a check. Jane said he was gone a long time before she left the table and saw them chatting. They both said it was only a brief chat. 45 seconds to get to the patio door. A few minutes inside the apartment. Do the maths it doesn't add up. A reconstruction would address this important issue. Actually it's crucial in my theory. Means, opportunity and motive have to be investigated or your not doing your job properly.

The conversation with Gerry lasted for about three minutes during which Gerry was chatty and in his normal self. Jeremy then made his way back to his apartment.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm

But that is the whole point.   None of them knew for definite the exact times of different events.   They are all approximations, therefore there is no guarantee that any of them (apart from Gerry's 9.5) are accurate.

You are treating the times given as if they are accurate.   They are not.  They are the times which different people truthfully thought were the right times, but there is no guarantee that they are accurate.  Especially as different people have different perceptions of times and distances.   

IIRC Jez said that he spent 3 to 5 mins speaking to Gerry?

(Must go out now)

[faithlilly]

No it wouldn't prove that IMO.       It took seconds for JT to pass them by.    If one had his back to her and the other was looking in a different direction and they were deep in conversaton - then it is perfectly possible they missed her.

Unfortunately there is no way I can prove it, but I know it is possible from personal experience.   My grandson sat in his car - parked at the curb, with the door wide open -  talking to me.  I was standing at my gate about 2/3 metres away saying goodbye to him.        As he leaned out to close his door he dropped his keys and in the time it took him to retrieve them and look up again  - a jogger passed between us.   

When I commented on the jogger's hilarious shorts - grandson said.... ''what shorts''.  He had no idea that anyone had just passed within a few feet of him.   In the meantime the jogger had disappeared round a corner.

And this was in broad daylight.

Firstly the jogger was moving swiftly, Tanner was not. Secondly one of you saw him. I don't think even you'd suggest that it was credible that both of you would have missed him.

[pathfinder73]

But that is the whole point.   None of them knew for definite the exact times of different events.   They are all approximations, therefore there is no guarantee that any of them (apart from Gerry's 9.5) are accurate.

You are treating the times given as if they are accurate.   They are not.  They are the times which different people truthfully thought were the right times, but there is no guarantee that they are accurate.  Especially as different people have different perceptions of times and distances.   

IIRC Jez said that he spent 3 to 5 mins speaking to Gerry?

(Must go out now)

That explains why you would never be a good detective. They have to be exact to fit everything together.

"I can remember Kate sort of saying ‘Oh bet he’s put the footy on’, because I think there was a football match that night and she sort of said ‘Oh I think he’s probably’, erm, you know, ‘got side tracked and put the telly on and catch up on the score’" (JT at the table before she left)

Now show me where Gerry said that ? Kate said it to probably explain his long absence.

[Montclair]

Think doesn't enter into it.

Perhaps Portuguese law will do the decent think and consign (Portuguese style!) "reconstitutions" to the history book of Portuguese law.

We can but hope ...

France and Italy also do reconstructions in the same way as the Portuguese, with the people involved and in order to find the truth of what happened. Should they ditch their methods because they do not please you and the McCanns?

[pathfinder73]

For Benice - watch it and pay attention. I wonder if they were reading this forum. 5 minutes would be a normal check so for someone to be talked about being gone a long time your talking up to twice that time away i.e. 10 minutes. Remember that this happened before Jane left the table!

[G-Unit]

You also have to take into account footwear. Jane Tanner was wearing flip flops and hurrying. Flip flops make a noise. So were the men both deaf as well as blind?

[Brietta]

You also have to take into account footwear. Jane Tanner was wearing flip flops and hurrying. Flip flops make a noise. So were the men both deaf as well as blind?

Isn't it wonderful that the PJ and SY were able to overcome all these terribly important some might even think myopic events and manage to find enough evidence to re-open the inquiry into Madeleine McCann's case.

HOLMES in conjunction with Oporto 'feet on the ground' seem to have been a wonderful combination in relation to 'reconstitution' of events.