UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: G-Unit on September 20, 2016, 07:49:54 PM
-
Fascinating;
This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_light.jpg.jpg)
This is a magazine in normal electric light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_image_01.jpg.jpg)
This is the same magazine under a sodium street light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_inlight.jpg.jpg)
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/
It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show under sodium street lights, so Jane is probably mistaken.
About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm
She thought that it was a female child because the pyjamas were a light colour (seemingly pink to her). She never saw the hair of the child. She never saw it move nor make any sound, thinking that it was asleep.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm
I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink. That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
118
-
Fascinating;
This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_light.jpg.jpg)
This is a magazine in normal electric light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_image_01.jpg.jpg)
This is the same magazine under a sodium street light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_inlight.jpg.jpg)
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/
It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show under sodium street lights, so Jane is probably mistaken.
About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm
She thought that it was a female child because the pyjamas were a light colour (seemingly pink to her). She never saw the hair of the child. She never saw it move nor make any sound, thinking that it was asleep.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm
I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink. That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
This from the point of view of photography but the actual perception of the person there is different again, Jane has not taken a photo but is taking a mental perception where the perception has adjusted the perceived colours.
I have dabbled in experiments of this type myself, so I know a little about it but I never got as far as doing a scientific paper on it.
So what I'm saying she still may have been able to perceive the colour pink even if a photograph might not back this up.
-
Fascinating;
This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_light.jpg.jpg)
This is a magazine in normal electric light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_image_01.jpg.jpg)
This is the same magazine under a sodium street light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_inlight.jpg.jpg)
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/
It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show under sodium street lights, so Jane is probably mistaken.
About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm
She thought that it was a female child because the pyjamas were a light colour (seemingly pink to her). She never saw the hair of the child. She never saw it move nor make any sound, thinking that it was asleep.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm
I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink. That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
For the record, I have 'skulked' outside 5A at precisely the time of the Tanner sighting on some 3rd May or other, with the aim of trying to find out precisely what Jane Tanner could and could not see.
I did not realise at the time that the street lights had been replaced, so I was not successful in replicating the Tanner sighting exactly.
I have no idea how much light the current units provide compared to the previous units, so I can't do some sort of balancing adjustment either.
So all I can do is report what I saw.
At the time of the Tanner sighting, my eyes were changing from the last vestiges of colour vision to black and white. I could still see and distinguish light colours, such as yellow and pink. But dark colours such as dark blue, dark red, dark brown, all looked different but I could not tell which was which, only that they were dark.
My eyes are, unfortunately, much older than Jane's. And I have no idea how good or poor her colour vision is. So that is open to question.
There is also the matter of the precise timing of the Tanner sighting. A few minutes before and I could make out even dark colours. A few minutes later and I could not make out any colours whatsoever.
Personally, I think that sodium street lights are such a common experience in the UK that people have learned how to adjust for them, whereas a camera cannot.
Perhaps you need to conduct a different experiment? You need clothes similar to Madeleine's (and probably Tannerman's). And a friend to role-play Tannerman whilst you watch, or vice-versa.
Since Luz is not replete with friends interested in the MBM case, and since I have no idea where the nearest M&S is, I am somewhat stuffed on this one.
-
Fascinating;
This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_light.jpg.jpg)
This is a magazine in normal electric light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_image_01.jpg.jpg)
This is the same magazine under a sodium street light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_inlight.jpg.jpg)
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/
It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show under sodium street lights, so Jane is probably mistaken.
About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm
She thought that it was a female child because the pyjamas were a light colour (seemingly pink to her). She never saw the hair of the child. She never saw it move nor make any sound, thinking that it was asleep.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm
I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink. That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
Jane wasn't mistaken as verified by the Met.
-
For the record, I have 'skulked' outside 5A at precisely the time of the Tanner sighting on some 3rd May or other, with the aim of trying to find out precisely what Jane Tanner could and could not see.
.....
Very much appreciated SiL, for I did a similar thing in NZ where I waited till the exact same time of day to see the effects of the sun rising ... but just at the moment I needed the clouds rolled in.
So you need the same cloud cover, was the Moon in the same place? The movement of cars with their headlights would be another factor which can't be replicated. A car may have just been leaving the supermarket and the lights shown up the road momentarily but long enough for Jane to see the pyjamas even though it was generally too dark.
-
It's all very interesting what Jane may or may not have seen.
The MPS seem to believe that whatever it was she saw was not some geezer abducting Madeleine McCann but another geezer with his child.
Pink, yellow or sky blue pink with orange spots becomes a bit of an irrelevance along in this instance with lux lumens, watts or ft candles...
-
Even Goncalo Amaral questions Jane's memory of the event. He thought an abductor would go in the other direction. So in one of my many reports to Scotland Yard I argued that the abductor was walking to the West rather that the East.
But is that possible and still be moving from the "left to the right" in Jane's visual memory?
-
Very much appreciated SiL, for I did a similar thing in NZ where I waited till the exact same time of day to see the effects of the sun rising ... but just at the moment I needed the clouds rolled in.
So you need the same cloud cover, was the Moon in the same place? The movement of cars with their headlights would be another factor which can't be replicated. A car may have just been leaving the supermarket and the lights shown up the road momentarily but long enough for Jane to see the pyjamas even though it was generally too dark.
I did not check the moonlight, for the simple reason that I did not know on my simulation that on 3 May 2007 it was a full moon, but the moon had not arisen. So, no moon on Jane Tanner's night, and while I don't remember any moon-cast shadows on my outing, I was not specifically checking.
The supermarket closed at 8pm that evening (3 May 2007). Jenny Murat claimed a near-accident in a car after she nipped out to the supermarket to get some bread before it closed that evening, and says 8pm was closing time. Plus someone on here was kind enough to point out to me that there is an entry on the Wayback Machine for 2 May 2007 showing the closing time of Baptista was 8pm.
Jane Tanner did not report a car or car headlights, so all in all, I have no reason to believe in illumination by a car.
-
I did not check the moonlight, for the simple reason that I did not know on my simulation that on 3 May 2007 it was a full moon, but the moon had not arisen. So, no moon on Jane Tanner's night, and while I don't remember any moon-cast shadows on my outing, I was not specifically checking.
The supermarket closed at 8pm that evening (3 May 2007). Jenny Murat claimed a near-accident in a car after she nipped out to the supermarket to get some bread before it closed that evening, and says 8pm was closing time. Plus someone on here was kind enough to point out to me that there is an entry on the Wayback Machine for 2 May 2007 showing the closing time of Baptista was 8pm.
Jane Tanner did not report a car or car headlights, so all in all, I have no reason to believe in illumination by a car.
What did you mean by "the moon had not risen"? I thought at the full moon as the Sun is going down the Moon is basically rising on the East soon after, so is the view to the East blocked by hills at PdL?
-
What did you mean by "the moon had not risen"? I thought at the full moon as the Sun is going down the Moon is basically rising on the East soon after, so is the view to the East blocked by hills at PdL?
From memory , the moon rose at 10pm that night.
Somewhere on this forum I have posted moonrise times, weather conditions, sea conditions and tidal times at relatively nearby Faro.
-
What did you mean by "the moon had not risen"? I thought at the full moon as the Sun is going down the Moon is basically rising on the East soon after, so is the view to the East blocked by hills at PdL?
Moonrise was about 10pm that evening. At a full moon, the sun and moon are roughly 12 hours apart. So they take it turns, not appearing together on stage.
From this and other sources, it is also known that it was low tide about 10pm, going to high tide at about 04:15 on 4 May, thus making body deposition in the sea, on the beach, or on the rocks extremely unlikely.
-
Fascinating;
This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_light.jpg.jpg)
This is a magazine in normal electric light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_image_01.jpg.jpg)
This is the same magazine under a sodium street light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_inlight.jpg.jpg)
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/
It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show under sodium street lights, so Jane is probably mistaken.
About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm
She thought that it was a female child because the pyjamas were a light colour (seemingly pink to her). She never saw the hair of the child. She never saw it move nor make any sound, thinking that it was asleep.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm
I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink. That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
Thanks for these images SIL, but I would point out that in the top image showing sodium light, there is a person who is wearing pink and there is a green area also ... both clearly visible.
Certainly sodium light is supposed not to show colour, so it seems there must have been a bit of normal light there.
In my theory, I have always felt that as the getaway vehicle pulled out of the little parking area (opposite the Tapas Reception), to pick up Tannerman and Madeleine, his vehicle headlights flashed briefly up the street.
But there could have been a light in a window, or another vehicle going along the top road that briefly showed the pink up.
I do think that the mind also compensates for missing colour somewhat. Dont know how.
But well done to you three guys who have sleuthed this out
BTW, it has been decades since I saw sodium lights in the UK. They may still be there but I never see them ... vile things.
-
Moonrise was about 10pm that evening. At a full moon, the sun and moon are roughly 12 hours apart. So they take it turns, not appearing together on stage.
From this and other sources, it is also known that it was low tide about 10pm, going to high tide at about 04:15 on 4 May, thus making body deposition in the sea, on the beach, or on the rocks extremely unlikely.
http://www.timeanddate.com/moon/portugal/faro?month=5&year=2007 OK Thanks and to Sadie also.
-
For the record, I have 'skulked' outside 5A at precisely the time of the Tanner sighting on some 3rd May or other, with the aim of trying to find out precisely what Jane Tanner could and could not see.
I did not realise at the time that the street lights had been replaced, so I was not successful in replicating the Tanner sighting exactly.
I have no idea how much light the current units provide compared to the previous units, so I can't do some sort of balancing adjustment either.
So all I can do is report what I saw.
At the time of the Tanner sighting, my eyes were changing from the last vestiges of colour vision to black and white. I could still see and distinguish light colours, such as yellow and pink. But dark colours such as dark blue, dark red, dark brown, all looked different but I could not tell which was which, only that they were dark.
My eyes are, unfortunately, much older than Jane's. And I have no idea how good or poor her colour vision is. So that is open to question.
There is also the matter of the precise timing of the Tanner sighting. A few minutes before and I could make out even dark colours. A few minutes later and I could not make out any colours whatsoever.
Personally, I think that sodium street lights are such a common experience in the UK that people have learned how to adjust for them, whereas a camera cannot.
Perhaps you need to conduct a different experiment? You need clothes similar to Madeleine's (and probably Tannerman's). And a friend to role-play Tannerman whilst you watch, or vice-versa.
Since Luz is not replete with friends interested in the MBM case, and since I have no idea where the nearest M&S is, I am somewhat stuffed on this one.
Yes. The problem is that the reconstruction by the McCann's was done in complete darkness, but it's unlikely to have been completely dark at the actual time [which isn't certain anyway]. Russell went up at 9.30pm and he couldn't say if it was completely dark or not.
What is true is that you can't see certain colours under sodium lights. It's nothing to do with the eye of the beholder, it's to do with what sodium light reflects. As it contains no pink it can't reflect it, so the eyes can't see it because it's not there. I'm no scientist, but that seems to be what they're saying.
-
So to sum up this particular argument - JT says she saw pink, it is scientifically impossible for her to have seen pink, crecheman's daughter was wearing pink, JT was right. The end.
-
So to sum up this particular argument - JT says she saw pink, it is scientifically impossible for her to have seen pink, crecheman's daughter was wearing pink, JT was right. The end.
Did she get anything else right?
-
So to sum up this particular argument - JT says she saw pink, it is scientifically impossible for her to have seen pink, crecheman's daughter was wearing pink, JT was right. The end.
Dunno. As I have another visitor due to haul up soon, perhaps we should street-test this.
-
For what it's worth, as there are still some street lights like the old ones in PdL where I live, I went out one night and took notes of what colour I thought various objects were. I then went back in daylight and they were indeed the colour I'd noted.
-
Did she get anything else right?
She got the details of the man and child she saw pretty much bang on didn't she?
-
Dunno. As I have another visitor due to haul up soon, perhaps we should street-test this.
Please do.
-
So to sum up this particular argument - JT says she saw pink, it is scientifically impossible for her to have seen pink, crecheman's daughter was wearing pink, JT was right. The end.
I would describe crecheman's child's pyjamas as being an orangy-pinky colour. Sodium lights pick up orange, so this reinforces that those were the pyjamas seen by Jane Tanner.
(http://i19.servimg.com/u/f19/18/18/19/63/pyjama10.jpg)
-
I would describe crecheman's child's pyjamas as being an orangy-pinky colour. Sodium lights pick up orange, so this reinforces that those were the pyjamas seen by Jane Tanner.
(http://i19.servimg.com/u/f19/18/18/19/63/pyjama10.jpg)
Not wishing to be disparaging, but my eyes see those pyjamas as blue. Do I need to get my eyes tested?
-
Not wishing to be disparaging, but my eyes see those pyjamas as blue. Do I need to get my eyes tested?
Me too ... but they might have shown up as being a lot lighter and be mistaken for white dependent on the lighting conditions.
Anyway, I don't think those are the PJs as seen and described by Jane Tanner.
-
Me too ... but they might have shown up as being a lot lighter and be mistaken for white dependent on the lighting conditions.
Anyway, I don't think those are the PJs as seen and described by Jane Tanner.
Neither do I.
-
Neither do I.
They could be, if .... is Crecheman.
-
Dunno. As I have another visitor due to haul up soon, perhaps we should street-test this.
The problem is that the lamps were replaced. Around where I live, there are both more recent ones and the older ones (which give off the same orangey light as in PdL at the time). I deliberately chose the orangey ones as I was actually expecting to find that at least some of my observations on colour would be incorrect when seen again in daylight.
I was quite surprised by this, as I'd had the frequent and irritating experience of hunting for small red objects under some kind of artificial lighting or other and discovered that anything red appeared black.
-
Decades ago I lived in a street lit by sodium lights and and when it was dark and lit only by them, you couldn't tell the true colour of anything.
-
Not wishing to be disparaging, but my eyes see those pyjamas as blue. Do I need to get my eyes tested?
So they are!!! I was referring to the bands at the bottom, can you see them?
-
Decades ago I lived in a street lit by sodium lights and and when it was dark and lit only by them, you couldn't tell the true colour of anything.
All I can say is that I managed to with street lights giving off an orangey glow.
The contrasting experience concerned artificial lights in off-street situations in which red became black. No way in hell of finding an object that I knew to be red.
I expect that Alice would know more about various forms of public lighting, if he's in a good mood...
-
Fascinating;
This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_light.jpg.jpg)
This is a magazine in normal electric light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_image_01.jpg.jpg)
This is the same magazine under a sodium street light;
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_inlight.jpg.jpg)
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/
It's highly unlikely that the colour pink would show under sodium street lights, so Jane is probably mistaken.
I totally agree, other factors undoubtedly led to that claim.
-
From another thread.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2709.msg91538#msg91538
When I saw the picture the other evening of the pyjamas that the tourists daughter was wearing I got to wondering how Jane Tanner could possible have misidentified them as having frilly bottoms. Depicted below is the artists impression created in conjunction with Tanner alongside a photograph of the actual clothing the little girl carried by Innocentman was actually wearing on the night she was seen by Tanner. The latter have normal length legs and no frills!
(http://i.imgur.com/MegeQ8j.jpg?1)
Jane Tanner has always denied that she knew what Madeleine was wearing on the night she disappeared. She certainly didn't know that her pyjamas were pink or had frilly bottoms or did she?
Now consider a photograph which I have just come across showing pyjamas identical to those worn by Madeleine. Pink with shortened legs and with frilly bottoms - judge for yourself!
(http://www.algarveresident.com/portugalresident/pix/18846_2.jpg)(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/mccannspyjamasberlin.jpg)
-
From another thread.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2709.msg91538#msg91538
When I saw the picture the other evening of the pyjamas that the tourists daughter was wearing I got to wondering how Jane Tanner could possible have misidentified them as having frilly bottoms. Depicted below is the artists impression created in conjunction with Tanner alongside a photograph of the actual clothing the little girl carried by Innocentman was actually wearing on the night she was seen by Tanner. The latter have normal length legs and no frills!
(http://i.imgur.com/MegeQ8j.jpg?1)
Jane Tanner has always denied that she knew what Madeleine was wearing on the night she disappeared. She certainly didn't know that her pyjamas were pink or had frilly bottoms or did she?
Now consider a photograph which I have just come across showing pyjamas identical to those worn by Madeleine. Pink with shortened legs and with frilly bottoms - judge for yourself!
(http://www.algarveresident.com/portugalresident/pix/18846_2.jpg)(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/mccannspyjamasberlin.jpg)
That may be why a doubt over the identity of Crecheman may still exist, John.
-
Frilly bottoms is something you don't get wrong even with sodium lights which leaves only two possibilities.
1. Jane Tanner did see Madeleine being carried off.
2. Jane Tanner overstated the frilly bottom claim.
'I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink. That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.'
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
-
Frilly bottoms is something you don't get wrong even with sodium lights which leaves only two possibilities.
1. Jane Tanner did see Madeleine being carried off.
2. Jane Tanner overstated the frilly bottom claim.
Does anyone know where the Crecheman's pyjamas came from?
-
Does anyone know where the Crecheman's pyjamas came from?
According to former DCI Redwood, from the tourist known as Crechman/Innocentman.
-
According to former DCI Redwood, from the tourist known as Crechman/Innocentman.
Thanks, John, I'm aware of that. But where were they bought?
-
Thanks, John, I'm aware of that. But where were they bought?
I'm assuming in the UK but as far as I'm aware it was never disclosed.
-
From another thread.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2709.msg91538#msg91538
When I saw the picture the other evening of the pyjamas that the tourists daughter was wearing I got to wondering how Jane Tanner could possible have misidentified them as having frilly bottoms. Depicted below is the artists impression created in conjunction with Tanner alongside a photograph of the actual clothing the little girl carried by Innocentman was actually wearing on the night she was seen by Tanner. The latter have normal length legs and no frills!
(http://i.imgur.com/MegeQ8j.jpg?1)
Jane Tanner has always denied that she knew what Madeleine was wearing on the night she disappeared. She certainly didn't know that her pyjamas were pink or had frilly bottoms or did she?
Now consider a photograph which I have just come across showing pyjamas identical to those worn by Madeleine. Pink with shortened legs and with frilly bottoms - judge for yourself!
(http://www.algarveresident.com/portugalresident/pix/18846_2.jpg)(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/mccannspyjamasberlin.jpg)
Yes the frilly bottoms was added to that sketch - make up your own mind as to why that happened to match the pyjamas her parents showed to the world but Jane didn't see frilly bottoms on the night.
She saw a different colour bottom turn ups which matches Crecheman's daughter pyjamas. That sighting has been cleared for good reason i.e. nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance but some may say an ideal patsy 8(0(* The point of argument is how she passed two men briefly chatting in a deserted street without either noticing. That suggests the pathway other route back to her apartment to avoid the men and may explain why she wasn't seen.
"I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was."
Jane Tanner
-
It comes down to this. If Redwood and SY are to be believed then the bottom of the pyjamas were distinctly orange with no frills so the witness was mistaken in her reference to them having a frill or frills.
-
Yes the frilly bottoms was added to that sketch - make up your own mind as to why that happened to match the pyjamas her parents showed to the world but Jane didn't see frilly bottoms on the night.
She saw a different colour bottom turn ups which matches Crecheman's daughter pyjamas. That sighting has been cleared for good reason i.e. nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance but some may say an ideal patsy 8(0(* The point of argument is how she passed two men briefly chatting in a deserted street without either noticing. That suggests the pathway other route back to her apartment to avoid the men and may explain why she wasn't seen.
"I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was."
Jane Tanner
The only source I can find for that image is Textusa ... can it be found anywhere else?
-
It comes down to this. If Redwood and SY are to be believed then the bottom of the pyjamas were distinctly orange with no frills so the witness was mistaken in her reference to them having a frill or frills.
Could we use other words rather than "mistaken"? When was it that the picture was drawn up? Jane Tanner is hugely influence by a newspaper article written on the Friday or Saturday where Fiona, Rachel and Jane all talk about the type of pyjamas Tanner sighting could have been wearing.
-
Frilly bottoms is something you don't get wrong even with sodium lights which leaves only two possibilities.
1. Jane Tanner did see Madeleine being carried off.
2. Jane Tanner overstated the frilly bottom claim.
'I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink. That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.'
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
I was working to see if we could find the reason Jane Tanner's memory faulted on this occasion?
So there could be more than 2 options:
1. Jane Tanner did see Madeleine being carried off.
2. Jane Tanner overstated the frilly bottom claim.
3. Jane Tanner spoke to someone who knew what Madeleine's pyjamas were like and this conversation influenced Jane's memory. And the memory of this conversation is mistaken.
The section of the rogatory interview speaks of the influence other factors had on her memory.
'I don’t, I didn’t know, I thought there was sort of a pink flowery bit on, bit on it, but, no, I mean, the actual frill itself or turn-up, as I thought it was, I couldn’t think of the colour, but I thought there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink. That’s, that’s what I thought at the time.'
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
The thought at the time description is pretty good. "there was pink sort of flowery and sort of like liney bits on the bottom, so.....I think they were sort of whitey but with this, with this pattern on, but then some pink."
The Creche man pyjamas they have pink flowers on them. They were light blue or "whitey" as she calls it.
"liney bits on the bottom" could be the straight edge cuffs which were "pink" in colour.
Had that drawing been made on the night it would have been more accurate. The fact that people note her memory improves is an indication she is picking up on what Madeleine was wearing IMO.
-
According to Jane she found out what Madeleine's pyjamas looked like on Saturday 5th;
I think when I realised the true significance of what I’d seen as well was almost like a couple of days afterwards when, erm, erm, I was talking to Fi about the pyjamas, because again it seems madness now why I hadn’t asked Kate and Gerry before this what the pyjamas were like, but it’s all sort of rha rha, you know, so I didn’t know what, what Madeleine’s pyjamas were before this. And I’d actually read in a paper that they were white, it was in the Telegraph, I think it was the day afterwards Dianne had bought a Telegraph paper and in there it was saying she was wearing plain white pyjamas, so I think when I read that I almost thought ‘Oh maybe I have got it wrong’, you know, because I’d, out of everything, I thought ‘Oh they weren’t just plain white’, I thought they had got some sort of thing on it. So I think it might have actually been the next morning, which would probably be the Saturday morning, I think I said something to, about oh, to Fi ‘Oh what were the pyjamas like’ and she actually described the pyjamas and she sort of said ‘Oh no that is what they were like’. And that was, I think that was almost the moment when I couldn’t convince myself anymore that it wasn’t that, you know.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
According to Kate she found out what Jane had seen on the morning of 4th when Jane came round to 5H, but I think she's got it wrong;
....mercifully. Russell, Jane, Matt, Rachael and their children began to arrive.That morning I learned of the man Jane had seen in the street...........Although Jane had never seen or known about Madeleine’s Eeyore pyjamas, her description of this child’s night clothes – light-coloured pink or white pyjamas with a ‘trailing’ or floral pattern and turn-ups on the bottoms – matched Madeleine’s almost exactly. From the style of these pyjamas, she had also assumed the child was a girl. There was little doubt in my mind then, nor is there now, that what Jane saw was Madeleine’s abductor taking her away. [Madeleine]
Jane denies going round that morning, however;
They had gone up into, erm, Dave and Fi, well decamped up to Dave and Fi’s room. There was lots of people running about and it was almost like, you know, I’ll just, not keep out of the way, but, you know, it was almost like, we didn’t feel we could, not we didn’t feel we could go up there, but it was almost like, you know, I don’t know how to put it into words, but, you know, you just sort of, I don’t know how to say this, it almost sounds like we were keeping out of the way. which is not what I’m saying at all, but, you know, they were so distraught, it was how do you talk to somebody like that, especially because we don’t know them that well, so they’re closest to Dave and Fi, so we almost like left Dave and Fi, you know, to cope with the emotional side of it, I suppose, is the best way of putting it.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm
Jane says it was a few days later;
I think it was, it was actually a few days later that we actually sat down and sort of I actually told them directly what I’d seen
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.html
Rachael said Saturday and she doesn't say they went to 5H on the morning of 5th, Matt took Grace to the Millenium for breakfast.
I think it must have been on the Saturday, erm that the pyjamas, Jane described the pyjamas to Fiona and Fiona found out from Kate, erm what Madeleine's pyjamas were like and they were the same as the ones that Jane had described'.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm
-
Thank you G-unit for that discussion but I saw the insight again, the one I had at the beginning of my investigation, and that is Fiona's knowledge of the pyjamas was not preceded by a conditional statement. She knew what Madeleine's pyjamas were like. She didn't say "Kate told me her pyjamas were like .... ".
Saturday morning, I think I said something to, about oh, to Fi ‘Oh what were the pyjamas like’ and she actually described the pyjamas and she sort of said ‘Oh no that is what they were like’.
I read yesterday GA in his book refers to Fiona having visited the McCanns the evening/night of the 3rd.
I'm just going off memory here but it is quite fresh. But this visit is not brought out in Fiona's statements that we have. This is part of the translation problem where more things were said than ever recorded in the translated statements which often appear more a summary rather than word for word recording.
-
Quote from Truth of the lie
There is a whole other version of that late afternoon, that of Fiona Payne. According to her, Gerry was not playing tennis but was in the apartment with Kate and the children. Apparently, she accompanied her husband when he went to the McCanns' apartment. Who is telling the truth?
Page #81 0f the online version.
-
Thank you G-unit for that discussion but I saw the insight again, the one I had at the beginning of my investigation, and that is Fiona's knowledge of the pyjamas was not preceded by a conditional statement. She knew what Madeleine's pyjamas were like. She didn't say "Kate told me her pyjamas were like .... ".
I read yesterday GA in his book refers to Fiona having visited the McCanns the evening/night of the 3rd.
I'm just going off memory here but it is quite fresh. But this visit is not brought out in Fiona's statements that we have. This is part of the translation problem where more things were said than ever recorded in the translated statements which often appear more a summary rather than word for word recording.
It may be something to do with this, from an LP officer;
I read carefully the written document/questionnaire provided by David Payne, but was not able to extricate any other information besides what is already known. He declares that he saw Madeleine, for the last time, at 17H00 on 3/5/07 in the McCann apartment. Also present there were Kate and Gerry. He did not indicate the motive for being there or what he was doing. He also cannot indicate how long he stayed....... Fiona Payne. In her depositions, she states that she went to the McCann apartment, around 19H00, on the 3rd of May, together with Kate. She states afterwards that, 10 minutes later, the husband arrived; it is not clear which husband she refers to.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATERINA-PAYNE-INCIDENT.htm
-
So at 7:00 PM the children had their pyjamas on for they were bathed before 6:00 PM. So Fiona would have seen the pyjamas if that reference was correct but Fiona appears to deny this first hand knowledge in her statements.
If it wasn't that fleeting remark to Jayne we would have no further confirmation that Fiona had been to the McCanns on the evening of the 3rd.
So do you agree she saw Madeleine's pyjamas or not?
-
So at 7:00 PM the children had their pyjamas on for they were bathed before 6:00 PM. So Fiona would have seen the pyjamas if that reference was correct but Fiona appears to deny this first hand knowledge in her statements.
If it wasn't that fleeting remark to Jayne we would have no further confirmation that Fiona had been to the McCanns on the evening of the 3rd.
So do you agree she saw Madeleine's pyjamas or not?
We don't have sight of these 'questionnaires' referred to, so who knows.
According to their statements DP was supposed to be at the beach at 5pm, and MBM was still at nursery. Kate was jogging, Gerry was hanging round the Tapas.
DP was playing tennis at 7pm, Fiona was in her apartment and Gerry was on his way back from tennis, Kate and kids in apartment.
-
Hopefully sy and lp and pj info has been all integrated
-
We don't have sight of these 'questionnaires' referred to, so who knows.
According to their statements .... ...... was supposed to be at the beach at 5pm, and MBM was still at nursery. Kate was jogging, Gerry was hanging round the Tapas.
.... ...... was playing tennis at 7pm, Fiona was in her apartment and Gerry was on his way back from tennis, Kate and kids in apartment.
We might not have the questionnaires but we have 3 references indicating Fiona had an opportunity to see Madeleine's pyjamas. That is 3 too many and her hesitation when questioned on this matter makes me feel Fiona needs to be questioned by SY re this aspect.
SY maybe able to access the questionnaire.
".... ...... was playing tennis at 7pm, Fiona was in her apartment " but it only takes a moment for Fiona to pop downstairs and talk to Kate.
-
The important thing was that the man Jane saw was carrying a child. The colour or frills or cuffs of the nightclothes she was wearing are in my opinion a bit of an irrelevance.
Only one child went missing that night. Only one child was seen being carried away,
...it was the norm to see parents carrying their kids home
-
The important thing was that the man Jane saw was carrying a child. The colour or frills or cuffs of the nightclothes she was wearing are in my opinion a bit of an irrelevance.
Only one child went missing that night. Only one child was seen being carried away,
But SY have to distinguish between the abductor and just innocent occurrences of children being carried in that location e.g. Creche Man so the colouration of the pyjamas becomes very important.
-
But SY have to distinguish between the abductor and just innocent occurrences of children being carried in that location e.g. Creche Man so the colouration of the pyjamas becomes very important.
Just to be "almost certain" &%+((£
-
Just to be "almost certain" &%+((£
Well who knows but to put a percentage on that it could be 99.9% certain. That is pretty close to "almost certain".
-
What i observe is that jane tanner has publically said she saw only the LEGS of the child (panorama)
So how does that square with the tapas 9 joint statement saying she saw a pink top? Anyone?
http://www.mccannfiles.com/imagelib/sitebuilder/misc/show_image.html?linkedwidth=actual&linkpath=http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/tapastimeline3.jpg&target=tlx_picyl09
-
What i observe is that jane tanner has publically said she saw only the LEGS of the child (panorama)
So how does that square with the tapas 9 joint statement saying she saw a pink top? Anyone?
http://www.mccannfiles.com/imagelib/sitebuilder/misc/show_image.html?linkedwidth=actual&linkpath=http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/tapastimeline3.jpg&target=tlx_picyl09
Where is this "So how does that square with the tapas 9 joint statement saying she saw a pink top?" Joint statement?
-
Where is it?
In my post and in your quote of it
&%+((£
-
But that is utter crap as it was the norm to see parents carrying their kids home
It was the norm on routes back from a creche
BUT
Where Tannerman was seen walking was NOT EN ROUTE from any creche.
-
It was the norm on routes back from a creche
BUT
Where Tannerman was seen walking was NOT EN ROUTE from any creche.
Unless he took the scenic route home or called in with someone for a chat. Maybe he collected the child from a private creche facility or local baby sitter?
-
Unless he took the scenic route home or called in with someone for a chat. Maybe he collected the child from a private creche facility or local baby sitter?
If he is Crechman, then he picked his daughter up from OC creche, which is in the opposite direction to the direction he was walking.
He didn't use a private creche.
-
Poor mr redwood ey?
-
Where is it?
In my post and in your quote of it
&%+((£
So it is the summary of all the statements or what someone thinks is a reasonable summary of all the statements.
I think it is "what someone thinks is a reasonable summary of all the statements" otherwise there would be ranges of times.
-
Decades ago I lived in a street lit by sodium lights and and when it was dark and lit only by them, you couldn't tell the true colour of anything.
That's because low pressure sodium vapour lights only give off monochromatic yellow light and has the worst colour rendering of any lamp.... ?{)(**
HP jobs give off a wider spectrum but the discrimination remains poor.
It is "Zee lows of pheesicks" apparently, but as we all know they do not apply in this topsy turvy of all worlds..... &%+((£
-
That's because low pressure sodium vapour lights only give off monochromatic yellow light and has the worst colour rendering of any lamp.... ?{)(**
HP jobs give off a wider spectrum but the discrimination remains poor.
It is "Zee lows of pheesicks" apparently, but as we all know they do not apply in this topsy turvy of all worlds..... &%+((£
As we know, different laws apply in Portugal @)(++(*
-
As we know, different laws apply in Portugal @)(++(*
There are also people in other countries whose eyes can defy the laws also, apparently.
-
(**) About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm
Jane Tanner ...
- could only see the legs of the child being carried
- the child was barefoot
- the pyjamas were light in colour ... possibly white ... possibly light pink
- Jane was not certain but had an impression of a pattern on the pyjamas
The description Jane gave of the colour of the man's trousers is explained here by Heri ...
http://espacioexterior.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/the-madeleine-mccann-abduction-janosch.html ... where he describes in detail why it is his opinion that the trousers she saw were white.
It is a fallacy to state that there is no understanding of the laws of physics.
However much manufactured argument there may be about the colour of the child's pyjamas, there is no dispute that the man was carrying a barefoot child.
The fact that short time later a child was found to be missing from her bed a few yards away should probably have excited the interest of the law enforcement personnel who were informed of that fact.
As far as I am concerned the focus of interest is the child ... not her pyjamas.
-
I'm puzzled as to how Jane could decide that she (the child) was sleeping when she only saw her legs.
-
So it is the summary of all the statements or what someone thinks is a reasonable summary of all the statements.
I think it is "what someone thinks is a reasonable summary of all the statements" otherwise there would be ranges of times.
Err, no, its nothing to do with police statements given, it is a combined summary penned by the tapas 9 group themselves (control risks?) issued to police 10 may
....
Which leaves the question unanswered, why was tanner said to have seen a top in pink whch contradicts all her other statements
-
I'm puzzled as to how Jane could decide that she (the child) was sleeping when she only saw her legs.
Now I would be highly suspicious of anything that struck me as being unusual about a man carrying a child as Jane witnessed.
Back then, I would probably have thought what she did.
If the child had been carried in an upright position and looking around = awake.
If lying in the arms in a relaxed position = asleep.
In the former position there was a chance the pyjama top could have been described even if the colour might have been altered by the light.
In the latter, the top would have been invisible (remember, Jane was approaching in an uphill direction) and the sighting would have been as described.
What do you think?
-
Err, no, its nothing to do with police statements given, it is a combined summary penned by the tapas 9 group themselves issued to police 10 may
....
Which leaves the question unanswered, why was tanner said to have seen a top in pink whch contradicts all her other statements
If memory serves me well ... Jane was unable to describe the top to the artist compiling the efit drawing and the artist added a pink smudge in representation.
I believe she wasn't content with the depiction of the trousers either ... but I don't think the child was the issue, the artist was making a representation of the man.
Find the man ... find out who the child was and what had become of her.
-
I think its rubbish. She said she only saw her legs. In the dark For only a few seconds.
-
If memory serves me well ... Jane was unable to describe the top to the artist compiling the efit drawing and the artist added a pink smudge in representation.
I believe she wasn't content with the depiction of the trousers either ... but I don't think the child was the issue, the artist was making a representation of the man.
Find the man ... find out who the child was and what had become of her.
Who mentioned any artist?
The topic of discussion was the joint tapas group statement of 10 may prepared for delivery to police in whch it was typed that jane saw the top, possibly pink, which contradicts her other given statements...where she says she only saw a pair of legs!!
http://www.mccannfiles.com/imagelib/sitebuilder/misc/show_image.html?linkedwidth=actual&linkpath=http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/tapastimeline3.jpg&target=tlx_picyl09
-
Err, no, its nothing to do with police statements given, it is a combined summary penned by the tapas 9 group themselves (control risks?) issued to police 10 may
....
Which leaves the question unanswered, why was tanner said to have seen a top in pink whch contradicts all her other statements
When you put that post up yesterday you didn't give me the source, so don't growl at me. You didn't tell me the background of the document. If it was "issued to police 10 may" Jane may have remembered something after this date? Jane is the spouse of Russell. Are you leading us on to look at Russell?
-
When you put that post up yesterday you didn't give me the source, so don't growl at me. You didn't tell me the background of the document. If it was "issued to police 10 may" Jane may have remembered something after this date? Jane is the spouse of Russell. Are you leading us on to look at Russell?
No, jane didnt remember somethng after, as she went onto the programme panorama 7 months later and repeated she only saw legs...she has never said she saw a top, never, so why that is in there is a mystery
No, I am not leading you to look at Russell or anythng else apart from what I typed
-
I went to double-check again with a pink cloth placed under an orangey street light at what I would describe as just prior to night: I could still distinguish a difference between the sky and buildings in the absence of artificial light, however one chooses to describe that.
I had wondered if my perception of colour could have been different based on what I'd found to be a pink plastic or paper wrapper the following day on a previous occasion.
Nope. The pink cloth thing was still definitely pink to my eyes under this orangey old street light.
That said, I have no idea what type of lights these actually are, aside from the fact they are most definitely not recent and that they give off an orangey light. I also know that a different type of light makes red appear black to me and therefore invisible to me in total darkness, so I am aware of that.
-
Ah but were you 30 foot away?
-
Ah but were you 30 foot away?
I placed the pink cloth object near a light on a grassy area behind a pavement and looked at it from the pavement on the other side of a lane with room for two cars to pass each other.
I'm not sure what distance that would be... but that would seem to be a similar distance to me.
-
Sounds as if it might come down to how dark it was at about 9.15. Does anyone know ?
-
Sounds as if it might come down to how dark it was at about 9.15. Does anyone know ?
No one describes it as dark. It was the night of the full moon so it would never get totally dark that night.
-
The degree of darkness would depend upon whether the area that Tanner man was seen was in shadow, or not.
-
No one describes it as dark. It was the night of the full moon so it would never get totally dark that night.
Moonrise was around 10pm so has no relevance to the Tanner sighting, or the Smithman sighting, other than there was no moonlight.
-
I placed the pink cloth object near a light on a grassy area behind a pavement and looked at it from the pavement on the other side of a lane with room for two cars to pass each other.
I'm not sure what distance that would be... but that would seem to be a similar distance to me.
No, not 30 feet
Thats about 9-10 metres away at night and only a few seconds
-
No, not 30 feet
Thats about 9-10 metres away at night and only a few seconds
??
-
Moonrise was around 10pm so has no relevance to the Tanner sighting, or the Smithman sighting, other than there was no moonlight.
But I'm sure the dusk period would be less dark because the Moon is about to rise.
On a full moon night it doesn't get really dark between sunset and moonrise.
-
??
Mercury is questioning how far away you could be before you can't see pink any more.
-
What I was trying to double-check is whether what I had perceived to be a pinkish object, and verified as being so the next day, would have appeared the same to me if the object was cloth-based.
My answer to that is yes. But try it for yourselves with a similar distance and with orangey street lamps.
-
??
your distance compared to jane tanners
-
Mercury is questioning how far away you could be before you can't see pink any more.
Sort of, thanks
-
But I'm sure the dusk period would be less dark because the Moon is about to rise.
It's not about to rise at the time of the Tannerman sighting. It was 45 minutes off and still had Boavista to overcome.
It's not influencing the Smithman sighting for the simple fact that took place between two multi-story blocks of flats.
Does it get brighter in NZ the farther the sun is down? We don't have the Southern Cross in Luz.
-
The degree of darkness would depend upon whether the area that Tanner man was seen was in shadow, or not.
What is the light source behind the object causing the shadow?
-
Mercury is questioning how far away you could be before you can't see pink any more.
I was roughly as far away as JT described in her rog.
There were two pavements between me and the object and a lane in which two cars could pass. Aside from this orangey lighting, I could just distinguish between the sky and the outline of objects in my path (including the outline of buildings).
Make of that what you will, I was just trying to satisfy my own curiosity.
-
your distance compared to jane tanners
JT couldn't be sure as to an accurate distance. I was 2 pavements away with a small lane and little natural light left. My gesstimate would be that I was 7-8 metres from the cloth object.
-
It's not about to rise at the time of the Tannerman sighting. It was 45 minutes off and still had Boavista to overcome.
It's not influencing the Smithman sighting for the simple fact that took place between two multi-story blocks of flats.
Does it get brighter in NZ the farther the sun is down? We don't have the Southern Cross in Luz.
As far as I know Portugal and New Zealand are just about antipodes. So we have similar long dusk periods in summer. Down South you can still see without torches at 10:00 PM. OK we do get more light of the Milky Way as well. But up North it might be light enough to see at 9:00 PM. I've heard the closer you get to the equator the cut off between day and night is more sudden.
-
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/cri_explained.htm
http://www.edisontechcenter.org/SodiumLamps.html
-
JT couldn't be sure as to an accurate distance. I was 2 pavements away with a small lane and little natural light left. My gesstimate would be that I was 7-8 metres from the cloth object.
Yes you might be right
Number 4 on this drawing is where she was when seeing the man...whats the distance?
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P1/01_VOLUME_Ia_Page_50.jpg)
-
Yes you might be right
Number 4 on this drawing is where she was when seeing the man...whats the distance?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P1/01_VOLUME_Ia_Page_50.jpg
Re this map - if one was exiting from 5a excitedly with Madeleine, would one not go diagonally across the road from 7 to 8, rather than from 7 to 5 and then to 8 ?
-
Re this map - if one was exiting from 5a excitedly with Madeleine, would one not go diagonally across the road from 7 to 8, rather than from 7 to 5 and then to 8 ?
When you've got a child in your arms and you are trying to get away you wouldn't want to be carrying it too far.
-
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/cri_explained.htm
http://www.edisontechcenter.org/SodiumLamps.html
Thank you Alice
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/cri_explained.htm
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather1.jpg
(http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather1.jpg)
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather2.jpg
(http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather2.jpg)
The blurb talks about Monochromatic light, yet I swear that I can see pink lips in the sodium light image.
The same as we could see pink colour in one of the images that shining posted
-
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/cri_explained.htm
http://www.edisontechcenter.org/SodiumLamps.html
What cameras record and human brains register aren't necessarily identical, however.
I didn't even bother to take a camera with me earlier as I knew that it wouldn't reflect what I would register as recognisable colours.
That doesn't mean that one person's perception of colour under various lighting conditions will always be identical, let alone accurate.
All I can say is that I could identify basic colours as distinct from each other. If I were to be presented with a fine array of shades of any particular colour and had to rely on memory.... I don't know, I haven't tried to experiment that far.
-
What cameras record and human brains register aren't necessarily identical, however.
I didn't even bother to take a camera with me earlier as I knew that it wouldn't reflect what I would register as recognisable colours.
That doesn't mean that one person's perception of colour under various lighting conditions will always be identical, let alone accurate.
All I can say is that I could identify basic colours as distinct from each other. If I were to be presented with a fine array of shades of any particular colour and had to rely on memory.... I don't know, I haven't tried to experiment that far.
Am interested, do you see pink lips on this image Carana, like i do?
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather2.jpg
(http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather2.jpg)
-
Thank you Alice
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/cri_explained.htm
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather1.jpg
(http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather1.jpg)
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather2.jpg
(http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather2.jpg)
The blurb talks about Monochromatic light, yet I swear that I can see pink lips in the sodium light image.
The same as we could see pink colour in one of the images that shining posted
They human mind will see what it expects to see, you know lips are pink so the brain fills in the missing info. When you are told something happened in the past that you witnessed your memory can fill in the gaps.
-
Thank you Alice
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/cri_explained.htm
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather1.jpg
(http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather1.jpg)
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather2.jpg
(http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather2.jpg)
The blurb talks about Monochromatic light, yet I swear that I can see pink lips in the sodium light image.
The same as we could see pink colour in one of the images that shining posted
If the lipstick had any orange pigment in it that could explain why you see it. At least the pics tell us that the blue crecheman pyjamas would have appeared as white under those street lights.
I posted the other images, by the way, not SIL.
-
If the lipstick had any orange pigment in it that could explain why you see it. At least the pics tell us that the blue crecheman pyjamas would have appeared as white under those street lights.
...
They could do, the blue hat looks orangey which maybe interpreted as white.
-
They could do, the blue hat looks orangey which maybe interpreted as white.
Well, it was by Jane Tanner and co. The white flowers below have a yellow appearance under sodium light. It also suggests that red might appear as pink, so the orange band on the crecheman pyjamas may have looked the same.
(http://www.bonjour-odyssey.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/flower.png)
Yellow light from an incandescent source, fitted with a yellow filter (left) ,allows fairly good colour perception, but under the monochromatic yellow light from a low-pressure sodium lamp (right), it is impossible to distinguish between colours.
The colour rendering index (Ra for Rendition absolute) is given below for a selection of much-used lamp types:
(http://www.bonjour-odyssey.com.sg/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/table.png)
For values below 25, the colour rendering index has no practical meaning. As a matter of fact because of the calculation method used – it can even take negative values!
http://www.bonjour-odyssey.com.sg/resources/colour-rendering/
-
Under low pressure sodium light most colours are distorted and if you didn't know what a colour was in advance, it would be difficult to accurately determine it.
Dyes used in clothing can be particularly deceptive as they are mostly a combination of dyes mixed to give a certain shade in 'normal' light and these can present very differently under different lighting conditions - eg sunlight versus strip light.
-
It would all depend upon the dye makeup and the exact lighting conditions, which could only be done by actually testing it. Nothing would come out as white under a sodium light.
-
Am interested, do you see pink lips on this image Carana, like i do?
http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather2.jpg
(http://www.fullspectrumsolutions.com/images_templ/graphics/heather2.jpg)
If I look really closely, they do appear pink to me, but if I look at the picture as a whole from further away, I'm not entirely sure whether I'm just assuming they are or not, nor would I be able to tell whether there was a slight shade of lipstick or not.
On the other hand, I expect that many of us (certainly myself) have taken photos in artificial lighting without a flash and have been disappointed that the colours didn't reflect the visual perception of them - i.e., what a camera records isn't necessarily what the brain perceives.
It is of course possible that different people may have slightly different perceptions as to shade in the same conditions.
An exception that I've experienced, along with everyone with me on every occasion, is that a certain type of light makes red appear black. I've no idea what type of light that would be as I haven't looked into it. Whatever that was, it is not the street lights that give off that orangey light.
-
People might find this interesting - http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/
Was the photo of the young woman in the woolly hat taken under a sodium lamp or under an orange filter?
A blue light will make red appear black
-
People might find this interesting - http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/experiments/exp/why-sodium-street-lights-make-things-look-orange/
Was the photo of the young woman in the woolly hat taken under a sodium lamp or under an orange filter?
A blue light will make red appear black
Presumably in common with other optical devices the human eye also suffers chromatic aberration ?.
-
I should think so. Even with your own eyes, one is likely to see slightly different colours when compared to the other.
Imagination also plays a part. If you think something should be a certain colour, that's what you will tend to see, even if someone else sees it differently - not extremes, but shades
-
I should think so. Even with your own eyes, one is likely to see slightly different colours when compared to the other.
Imagination also plays a part. If you think something should be a certain colour, that's what you will tend to see, even if someone else sees it differently - not extremes, but shades
Yes, I expect that to be the case as well.
There must be academic research on people's perceptions of colour in different lighting conditions - unless, of course, there hasn't been much demand for it.
My own little experiments were simply to satisfy my own curiosity and I'm not even certain that the old street lamps near me are of precisely the same type as the old PdL ones. I might be able to find out, however.
In my initial experiment (just taking notes of my perception of colours and checking again in daylight), the only things that I knew in advance to be of a certain colour in the areas I checked were the yellow lines on the road and leafy bushes or trees.
I had no idea of the colour of parked cars, sweet wrappers or any other objects that were there by chance.
Could that advance knowledge of bushes and road markings have influenced my perception of other colours? Possibly.
My next little experiment involved a pink cloth object. I was interested in whether cloth would make a difference as opposed to a similar colour on, e.g., a painted object.
The objective issue is that I knew that I'd taken a pink object, although it was a spur-of-the-moment idea using the first pinky cloth object that I'd found lurking somewhere, placed it in a plastic bag, and hadn't spent any time taking prior note of the shade - I did that afterwards. I was actually surprised to note that my perception was the same, but admittedly it wasn't a blind experiment.
My conclusion is that my own perception of colour seems to be fairly accurate, but that doesn't mean that that is the same for other people. And then, of course, there is the issue of trying to explain the memory of the colour / shade to others.
-
The more I think about it, the more I think that there should be research on this for forensic purposes.
There have been what I have found to be fascinating studies on memory recall (or call thereof) of events, so wouldn't similar studies on colour memory recall be of interest?
-
The more I think about it, the more I think that there should be research on this for forensic purposes.
There have been what I have found to be fascinating studies on memory recall (or call thereof) of events, so wouldn't similar studies on colour memory recall be of interest?
I'm sure there will be academic studies by the bucketload on this topic, but will any of them help?
You need Jane's eyeballs, or equivalent, at roughly the same time, at roughly the same distance, under whatever lighting there was on 3 May 2007. I would think you can test for frilly bottoms and floral patterns, but more than that would be guesswork.
-
The more I think about it, the more I think that there should be research on this for forensic purposes.
There have been what I have found to be fascinating studies on memory recall (or call thereof) of events, so wouldn't similar studies on colour memory recall be of interest?
I foresee a few problems:
Some people are red/green colour blind.
No one really knows what colour turquoise is.
The brain compensates for the fact we see images upside down so what else does it compensate for?
The Germans introduced introduced RAL numbers for colours about 90 years ago. I don't see any perp hanging still long enough to do a comparison with a RAL colour fan though !
May be what really counts is GISS, or JIZZ depending on where you was brung up?
-
Fascinating;
This is a sodium street light, as in Luz on 3rd May.
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_light.jpg.jpg)-snipped
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_light.jpg.jpg
(http://www.thenakedscientists.com/HTML/uploads/RTEmagicC_streetlight_light.jpg.jpg)
But hows about the pink and green on this (bottom RH corner)? I gave reasons for it saying that another light had shone on it, but what light might have shone on Tannerman?
-
The science of the sodium light spectra is indeed interesting but in the final analysis there was no better way of determining the question of the colour of the pyjamas than carrying out a reconstruction. The PJ never did this so I would say nil pont's on that front.
-
The science of the sodium light spectra is indeed interesting but in the final analysis there was no better way of determining the question of the colour of the pyjamas than carrying out a reconstruction. The PJ never did this so I would say nil pont's on that front.
I agree. Once the street lights were changed it became impossible too.
How about this for an interesting find; during the course of researching this subject I came upon a UK website where people interested in roads upload photos of roads, bridges, road signs - anything connected with roads. Road spotters, a bit like train spotters lol. I wonder why humans have this 'collecting' urge?
-
I agree. Once the street lights were changed it became impossible too.
How about this for an interesting find; during the course of researching this subject I came upon a UK website where people interested in roads upload photos of roads, bridges, road signs - anything connected with roads. Road spotters, a bit like train spotters lol. I wonder why humans have this 'collecting' urge?
I guess it depends on what is being 'collected'.
A fun day out for us was taking the kids to a museum, and when I tell you the kids were always eager to go, you should be able to work out it was no ordinary museum.
The first building you went to was the telephone room. It had all sorts of antique phones and switchboards in it, all working. Do you remember red phone boxes with a big cash box, where you put 4 old pennies in and pressed button A if the call connected, and pressed button B to get your 4 pence back if the call did not go through?
Yes the phone box worked and yes it took 4 old pennies per call. Our grandkids had never seen one of those boxes, but trying to drag them out of the telephone room was always a struggle.
Returning to Madeleine McCann, the lighting experiment depends on whether the Luz street lamps have all been replaced, or whether some of the 2007-spec ones are still around. I am under the impression that a key lamp at the Smith sighting is old-style, though I can't prove it. If it is 2007 vintage, then it would be possible to stage an equivalent there.
-
I guess it depends on what is being 'collected'.
A fun day out for us was taking the kids to a museum, and when I tell you the kids were always eager to go, you should be able to work out it was no ordinary museum.
The first building you went to was the telephone room. It had all sorts of antique phones and switchboards in it, all working. Do you remember red phone boxes with a big cash box, where you put 4 old pennies in and pressed button A if the call connected, and pressed button B to get your 4 pence back if the call did not go through?
Yes the phone box worked and yes it took 4 old pennies per call. Our grandkids had never seen one of those boxes, but trying to drag them out of the telephone room was always a struggle.
Returning to Madeleine McCann, the lighting experiment depends on whether the Luz street lamps have all been replaced, or whether some of the 2007-spec ones are still around. I am under the impression that a key lamp at the Smith sighting is old-style, though I can't prove it. If it is 2007 vintage, then it would be possible to stage an equivalent there.
Ours were fascinated by old-style fruit machines which use old pennies too. Those phone boxes were good; later ones swallowed your money whether you managed to connect or not.
That experiment might be good. A 'blind' test with various smallish different coloured items being shown to someone who hadn't seen them before would be ideal. At the appropriate time, date and distance of course. I'm trying to find some near me, but it's the time and date which can't be replicated here.
-
Ours were fascinated by old-style fruit machines which use old pennies too. Those phone boxes were good; later ones swallowed your money whether you managed to connect or not.
That experiment might be good. A 'blind' test with various smallish different coloured items being shown to someone who hadn't seen them before would be ideal. At the appropriate time, date and distance of course. I'm trying to find some near me, but it's the time and date which can't be replicated here.
And only for a couple of seconds as well ?{)(**