Author Topic: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.  (Read 220692 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1095 on: May 28, 2019, 09:34:41 PM »
That "disgraced, bungling, fat, lying, incompetent" and non-libelling retired policeman said in his book that
Jane Tanner identified Murat as the man she saw on 3rd May carrying a child.
Were they just 3 meters apart?  " Tanner pointed him out from 3 metres away" is what The General said in his post.
« Last Edit: May 28, 2019, 09:38:23 PM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline sadie

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1096 on: May 29, 2019, 09:50:35 PM »
Were they just 3 meters apart?  " Tanner pointed him out from 3 metres away" is what The General said in his post.

Seems to me that The General hasn't done his homework again.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm  Scroll most of the way down

snip-
So we then carried on and I met Bob SMALL and Russell wrote down the number plate of the car just in case I was taken away.  And, erm, then Bob drove me up to where, erm, the rest of the team were to do the surveillance.  Erm, so I went off in the back of this like refrigerated, well it was pretending to be a refrigerated, erm, van and took it round to the point on the road and obviously, in hindsight now, I realise they were probably calling Robert MURAT to try and get him to walk across, across the top of the road so that, you know, I could see.  But it was a bit odd because there was a car, where we were parked there was a car that moved just at that point that he appeared and then two other people walked by, so I didn’t really, but I didn’t even recognise it as the person I’d been talking to five minutes before, well, you know, half an hour before, so.  Erm, and then, erm, then went, I think because it has gone a bit wrong because this car had been there and then tried to set it up elsewhere, but again I couldn’t really see, I couldn’t really see that well and, you know, it didn’t look, it didn’t jog, jog any memories”.

4078    “Now you are left with that mental image in your head about the man carrying the child”.
Reply    “Umm”.
 
4078    “And you said, you described his hair quite well.  Having seen MURAT then and obviously in the papers since, could you link the two of those?”
Reply    “I don’t think so.  I mean, I don’t, phew, I don’t, I don’t think it, no, there doesn’t, there’s no, but then the person I see in the paper doesn’t really look like my recollection of the person I met on the way to meet Bob SMALL.  It’s really annoying because normally I would have probably taken more notice but I was so worried about what I was going to do, because I didn’t know at this point at all, I didn’t really take any notice, but I think it was too short and I remember it being, being long into the neck and not so.  Again, I don’t really, when I saw Robert MURAT outside his house he looked quite little to me, but then when you see him on the telly he seems quite bit, so I can’t, again, I don’t think the build, the build was right, I don’t”.

-snip-




This extract from JT's Rogatory Statement doesn't seem to reinforce anything that The General has been saying

Rather., it seems to be saying anything but …


Come on The General,
May we have a cite for everything that you have spoken about Jane Tanner and Robert Murat .   TY

Offline G-Unit

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1097 on: May 30, 2019, 06:09:45 AM »
Jane Tanner also said;

I don’t think it was him that I saw”.

4078    “No”.
 Reply    “But I just thought it was”.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

She appears to be saying she thought it was Murat at the time, but now she doesn't think it was.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1098 on: May 30, 2019, 07:14:25 AM »
Jane Tanner also said;

I don’t think it was him that I saw”.

4078    “No”.
 Reply    “But I just thought it was”.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

She appears to be saying she thought it was Murat at the time, but now she doesn't think it was.
That interpretation makes no sense IMO.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1099 on: May 30, 2019, 08:38:37 AM »
That interpretation makes no sense IMO.
How does one work that one out?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline barrier

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1100 on: May 30, 2019, 08:41:02 AM »
That interpretation makes no sense IMO.

Do you have one to share that iyo does?
This is my own private domicile and I shall not be harassed, biatch:Jesse Pinkman Character.

Offline sadie

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1101 on: May 30, 2019, 11:42:46 AM »
Jane Tanner also said;

I don’t think it was him that I saw”.

4078    “No”.
 Reply    “But I just thought it was”.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

She appears to be saying she thought it was Murat at the time, but now she doesn't think it was.
To me, she seems to be wondering if there were two men?   

Wondering if a substitute was used?  … but that would infer collusion for some bad reason by  the PJ.   But surely  that couldn't be ?

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1102 on: May 30, 2019, 11:56:16 AM »
Jane Tanner also said;

I don’t think it was him that I saw”.

4078    “No”.
 Reply    “But I just thought it was”.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

She appears to be saying she thought it was Murat at the time, but now she doesn't think it was.

He certainly seemed to be  the best choice as a baddie in the abduction story.  Al be it on someones 'hunch' OMG.
'Never underestimate the power of stupid people'... George Carlin

Offline G-Unit

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1103 on: May 30, 2019, 12:19:32 PM »
To me, she seems to be wondering if there were two men?   

Wondering if a substitute was used?  … but that would infer collusion for some bad reason by  the PJ.   But surely  that couldn't be ?

Expanding what she says we end up with;

"At this moment in time I don't think it was Robert Murat that I saw on 3rd May 2007"
"But at a previous moment in time I thought it was Robert Murat that I saw on 3rd May 2007"

How can you deduce from that that she's wondering if there were two men?

In my opinion she's saying she previously thought it was him, but she no longer thinks it was.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Brietta

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1104 on: May 30, 2019, 05:10:00 PM »
Expanding what she says we end up with;

"At this moment in time I don't think it was Robert Murat that I saw on 3rd May 2007"
"But at a previous moment in time I thought it was Robert Murat that I saw on 3rd May 2007"

How can you deduce from that that she's wondering if there were two men?

In my opinion she's saying she previously thought it was him, but she no longer thinks it was.

What action did the police take when given a positive ID?  Did anyone of them even think to take a witness statement or record it in any other way?  An identification must appear in the files somewhere ... where is it?
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Carana

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1105 on: May 30, 2019, 06:22:31 PM »
That interpretation makes no sense IMO.

Or could have thought that the others who thought they'd seen him were right. I don't find anything odd in callling a police contact in the circumstances. 

However, she doesn't seem to have been that convinced herself as she wasn't one of the people present for the confrontation.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1106 on: May 30, 2019, 07:06:33 PM »
Do you have one to share that iyo does?
Yes, but you’ll refuse to consider it so what’s the point of doing so?
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline G-Unit

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1107 on: May 30, 2019, 07:23:19 PM »
What action did the police take when given a positive ID?  Did anyone of them even think to take a witness statement or record it in any other way?  An identification must appear in the files somewhere ... where is it?

That whole episode was most peculiar. Bob Small rang Jane Tanner saying he wants to pick her up and take her to meet the Spanish Police. She mustn't tell anyone about it. Jane didn't know who Bob Small was. She thought it could be the press or even the man she'd seen on 3rd trying to trap her for some reason. Nevertheless she arranged to meet him at 7.30 in a car park. As a precaution she took Russell with her and he wtote down the number of the car Small drove her away in.

I don't think that's the whole story myself. No-one in their right mind would have gone anywhere near that car park if that was all the information they had.

Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline sadie

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1108 on: May 30, 2019, 07:52:04 PM »
That whole episode was most peculiar. Bob Small rang Jane Tanner saying he wants to pick her up and take her to meet the Spanish Police. She mustn't tell anyone about it. Jane didn't know who Bob Small was. She thought it could be the press or even the man she'd seen on 3rd trying to trap her for some reason. Nevertheless she arranged to meet him at 7.30 in a car park. As a precaution she took Russell with her and he wtote down the number of the car Small drove her away in.

I don't think that's the whole story myself. No-one in their right mind would have gone anywhere near that car park if that was all the information they had.

Jane has shown herself to be a very brave woman.  And to me, she seems the sort who would always do the RIGHT thing rather than the easy cowards way out

Fearful tho she would be, I think that she would take the risk for Madeleines sake

Offline G-Unit

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #1109 on: May 30, 2019, 07:59:44 PM »
Jane has shown herself to be a very brave woman.  And to me, she seems the sort who would always do the RIGHT thing rather than the easy cowards way out

Fearful tho she would be, I think that she would take the risk for Madeleines sake

How did she know it was the right thing? If, as she feared, she was about to be kidnapped by the abductor she was in danger of doing something wrong imo.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0