Author Topic: Tannerman  (Read 966 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jassi

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #45 on: September 13, 2019, 01:44:22 PM »
So whose scent do you think they were tracking?

I have no idea, but it could be anyone who had recently been in contact with the towel/blanket/whatever.

If some object more personal to Madeleine been used, such as her shoes or underwear, then it would be reasonable to have more trust in the tracker doggy performance - IMO
« Last Edit: September 13, 2019, 01:47:58 PM by jassi »
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -   Into year 13 and still no solution.

Offline kmc

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #46 on: September 13, 2019, 01:54:36 PM »
So whose scent do you think they were tracking?

You obviously think that they were tracking Madeleine's scent but realistically would an abductor carrying a child really think it a good escape plan to loop back through the main resort? If that was the case, they would have been better going out of the patio door.....which I assume you believe that they entered through?   Also, even if Madeleine was on foot, most children in my experience would have grabbed the soft toy or blanket for comfort, and at the very least would have been calling out or crying whilst walking down a pretty dark path - yet the scent makes it all the way to the Tapas car park without anyone hearing or seeing anything.  In my humble opinion, both the open shutters and the dog scent trail make the idea of two abductors more likely, but again I can't be sure as we don't know for sure who the dogs were tracking.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #47 on: September 13, 2019, 01:54:54 PM »
But what you seem to have a tendency to do is cherry pick ie you are sceptical about T9 testimony and yet on occasions you seem to want to rely on it if it supports your overall theory?

What I'm saying is that we can look at the testimony from entirely innocent witnesses eg JW and find contradictions and inconsistencies.  There's absolutely no reason for people to have perfect recall over mundane matters that at the time of hearing/seeing held no importance whatsoever.

Or are you suggesting 'Tannerman' and Dr T are not one of the same?  Are you suggesting 'Tannerman' is a figment of JT's imagination and Dr T just happened by at a similar time? 

The chances of Tannerman and Dr T not being one of the same are zero given they share similar physical features, wore the same clothes along with the babe in arms sharing the same physical features/clothes.

I'm sceptical of everyone's testimony and have no 'overall theory'. I'm pointing out the inconsistences in Jane's statements because her sighting has been seen as vital. Considering it was a mundane occurance her recall is amazingly detailed, down to the shoes this man was wearing.

Whoever was seen near 5A further explanation is needed as to why he was heading towards the night creche rather than away from it.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline barrier

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #48 on: September 13, 2019, 02:44:52 PM »
I'm sceptical of everyone's testimony and have no 'overall theory'. I'm pointing out the inconsistences in Jane's statements because her sighting has been seen as vital. Considering it was a mundane occurance her recall is amazingly detailed, down to the shoes this man was wearing.

Whoever was seen near 5A further explanation is needed as to why he was heading towards the night creche rather than away from it.

I don't think Redwood made direction of travel did he.
    Can you build an Emerald city with these grains of sand?       


Offline kmc

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #49 on: September 13, 2019, 03:01:32 PM »
I'm sceptical of everyone's testimony and have no 'overall theory'. I'm pointing out the inconsistences in Jane's statements because her sighting has been seen as vital. Considering it was a mundane occurance her recall is amazingly detailed, down to the shoes this man was wearing.

Whoever was seen near 5A further explanation is needed as to why he was heading towards the night creche rather than away from it.

Personally, I am not at all surprised that her recall was so amazingly detailed.  If she did witness a man carrying a child between 21.15/21.20 -  approximately 40-45 minutes later she learned that Madeleine was missing - so it would only be natural to think back to that sighting, which would still have been fresh enough to play over in her mind. On top of that we know she could not leave her apartment to search, due to her child being awake - so her mind must have played it over and over during those hours - especially as we know she believed, at that time, that she had witnessed the abduction and done nothing to stop it.  Also, as for the direction of the Tannerman - that particular direction has more than just the night creche available as a possible destination.  Even if Tannerman was Totman - why was he heading for the night creche on his own with only one of his two children at that time of night?   I can't recall but I am pretty sure that one of the night creche workers talked about most of the children having left creche by the time they heard about Madeleine disappearing which must have been just after 22.00...  Seems unlikely someone would walk a sleeping 2 year old child to a night creche at that time of night - only to leave them there for 30mins-hour.  However, if he did do that I would also have imagined that on collecting his child he would have at least joined the search party, especially as Gerry was one of his tennis playing set or that he would have been one of the people who gave a statement about the evening.  Additionally, if he was in fact returning to his apartment - he would have been walking in the opposite direction to Tannerman.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #50 on: September 13, 2019, 03:41:38 PM »
Crimewatch 2013 21:39

Eight families had left eleven children in the night creche. A British father had collected his two year old daughter from the creche. He had been walking near the McCann's apartment.

So he collected his child but no-one has explained why, if he was the man seen by Jane Tanner, he was heading towards the night creche, not away from it.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #51 on: September 13, 2019, 06:53:52 PM »
1.7m was written into the typed timeline, typed in English by British members of the group. No translations were required and discussion/explanation was easy. She saw the man and it was up to her to ensure the details were correct. There's a big difference between 5'6" and 5'10".
Who typed it up?  It was presented to the PJ by the British FLO.  Do you know if JT had sight of the document after it was typed up?
"The answer is that no-one here believes the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance" - G-Unit.

Offline Brietta

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #52 on: September 13, 2019, 07:27:44 PM »
I'm sceptical of everyone's testimony and have no 'overall theory'. I'm pointing out the inconsistences in Jane's statements because her sighting has been seen as vital. Considering it was a mundane occurance her recall is amazingly detailed, down to the shoes this man was wearing.

Whoever was seen near 5A further explanation is needed as to why he was heading towards the night creche rather than away from it.

What is 'inconsistent' in what Jane Tanner is on record as saying herself.  In my opinion you may well be placing too much reliance on what other people have said she said.

Please give an example using Jane Tanner's own words which supports your opinion of inconsistency.

Jane Tanner has no locus in explaining anything at all regarding the man she saw that was someone else's job and the pity of it is that it wasn't done until 2013.
The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ...  "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)"

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #53 on: September 14, 2019, 09:50:42 AM »
I don't think Redwood made direction of travel did he.

You're right he didn't.  He said:

"Having discussed with them what they were doing that night they themselves believed that they could be the Tanner sighting".

@ 21.20 in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ8jmdWlB8Y

Then there's a cut in filming and the narrator then states:

The British father had collected his 2 year old daughter from the creche.

Is that the narrator's own take or has he seen firm evidence that the British father was collecting his 2 year old from the creche at around the time JT saw a man crossing the T-junction near apartment 5A.

If 'Tannerman' and Dr T are one and the same (I think they are) could it be Dr T's party headed off to the Millennium for dinner and he waited in the apartment until his daughter fell asleep before taking her to the creche and then going on to Millennium to join the others?  The point is afaik we are not privy to what Dr T and his family were doing that night to know whether or not he was walking in the wrong direction.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2019, 10:50:55 AM by Holly Goodhead »
Setting the pussy among the pigeons!

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #54 on: September 14, 2019, 10:06:05 AM »
You obviously think that they were tracking Madeleine's scent but realistically would an abductor carrying a child really think it a good escape plan to loop back through the main resort? If that was the case, they would have been better going out of the patio door.....which I assume you believe that they entered through?   Also, even if Madeleine was on foot, most children in my experience would have grabbed the soft toy or blanket for comfort, and at the very least would have been calling out or crying whilst walking down a pretty dark path - yet the scent makes it all the way to the Tapas car park without anyone hearing or seeing anything.  In my humble opinion, both the open shutters and the dog scent trail make the idea of two abductors more likely, but again I can't be sure as we don't know for sure who the dogs were tracking.

But many believed 'Tannerman' was MM's abductor so you could just as easily ask would an abductor carrying a child really think it a good escape plan to cross a t-junction close to where T9 were staying hence JT made the observation?  If Tannerman was MM's abductor, I don't believe he was, I would have thought he would have been better walking away in the opposite direction?

I would assume MM was sleeping when she was abducted in much the same way the children seen with Tannerman and Smithman were.

Search and Rescue dogs are used all over the world in all sorts of situations and there's no evidence to suggest they're unreliable.  The items handed to the GNR officers to enable the dogs to sniff MM's scent had been in close proximity to MM's body.  Even if you believe KM wanted to mislead then whose scent were the dogs tracking?  If the twins, KM or GM they would have followed a different trail. 
Setting the pussy among the pigeons!

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #55 on: September 14, 2019, 10:09:31 AM »
Personally, I am not at all surprised that her recall was so amazingly detailed.  If she did witness a man carrying a child between 21.15/21.20 -  approximately 40-45 minutes later she learned that Madeleine was missing - so it would only be natural to think back to that sighting, which would still have been fresh enough to play over in her mind. On top of that we know she could not leave her apartment to search, due to her child being awake - so her mind must have played it over and over during those hours - especially as we know she believed, at that time, that she had witnessed the abduction and done nothing to stop it.  Also, as for the direction of the Tannerman - that particular direction has more than just the night creche available as a possible destination.  Even if Tannerman was Totman - why was he heading for the night creche on his own with only one of his two children at that time of night?   I can't recall but I am pretty sure that one of the night creche workers talked about most of the children having left creche by the time they heard about Madeleine disappearing which must have been just after 22.00...  Seems unlikely someone would walk a sleeping 2 year old child to a night creche at that time of night - only to leave them there for 30mins-hour.  However, if he did do that I would also have imagined that on collecting his child he would have at least joined the search party, especially as Gerry was one of his tennis playing set or that he would have been one of the people who gave a statement about the evening.  Additionally, if he was in fact returning to his apartment - he would have been walking in the opposite direction to Tannerman.

I'm not even aware Dr T played tennis let alone played with GM or had any sort of contact with the McCanns?

Afaik we don't have any direct testimony from Dr T and Mrs T?  All we have is second hand accounts from the likes of DCI Andy Redwood and the tabloid papers.
Setting the pussy among the pigeons!

Offline Brietta

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #56 on: September 14, 2019, 10:20:13 AM »
But many believed 'Tannerman' was MM's abductor so you could just as easily ask would an abductor carrying a child really think it a good escape plan to cross a t-junction close to where T9 were staying hence JT made the observation?  If Tannerman was MM's abductor, I don't believe he was, I would have thought he would have been better walking away in the opposite direction?

I would assume MM was sleeping when she was abducted in much the same way the children seen with Tannerman and Smithman were.

Search and Rescue dogs are used all over the world in all sorts of situations and there's no evidence to suggest they're unreliable.  The items handed to the GNR officers to enable the dogs to sniff MM's scent had been in close proximity to MM's body.  Even if you believe KM wanted to mislead then whose scent were the dogs tracking?  If the twins, KM or GM they would have followed a different trail.

If an eye witness sees a male carrying a child away from the scene of a kidnapping why is it not made a priority of the investigation to locate that individual and the child to rule them in or out of the equation?

Where is the evidence that was done?

The evidence is it wasn't looked at for nearly seven years after the event.  How do you justify that?
The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ...  "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)"

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #57 on: September 14, 2019, 11:04:25 AM »
If an eye witness sees a male carrying a child away from the scene of a kidnapping why is it not made a priority of the investigation to locate that individual and the child to rule them in or out of the equation?

Where is the evidence that was done?

The evidence is it wasn't looked at for nearly seven years after the event.  How do you justify that?

I wonder if the sighting would have been given the sort of importance it has if the person carrying the child was female? 

According to the tabloid press Dr T and Mrs T did contact the local police with a view to self-eliminate but it seems it was overlooked.

He was interviewed by the Guarda Nacional Republicana soon after Maddie, three, vanished in May 2007, but his wife Rachel said: “My husband had told the local police it could be him but we didn’t hear anything for years.

“When the police finally realised the significance it was too late to really help.

“We always thought it was Julian who was seen by Jane Tanner.

"But the national police who investigated didn’t get back to us and we don’t know if our information was ever passed on.”


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6225547/madeleine-mccann-gp-sighting-waste/

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-detectives-spent-four-12495545

A failing by all concerned I would say: Portuguese and UK investigating authorities along with the 4 private detective agencies.  Even KM, at the time her book was published in 2011, was still convinced 'Tannerman' was MM's abductor.
Setting the pussy among the pigeons!

Offline G-Unit

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #58 on: September 14, 2019, 11:11:58 AM »
I'm not even aware Dr T played tennis let alone played with GM or had any sort of contact with the McCanns?

Afaik we don't have any direct testimony from Dr T and Mrs T?  All we have is second hand accounts from the likes of DCI Andy Redwood and the tabloid papers.

Dr T played with Gerry in the men's tennis on 3rd May early evening;

 the deponent having left at 18H00 for a tennis game only for men, at which were: DAN, tennis instructor; JULIAN, with whom he had played tennis several times; and CURTIS, with whom he had also played.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: Tannerman
« Reply #59 on: September 14, 2019, 11:16:13 AM »
I guess its not unreasonable to ask the question why, if Dr T and Mrs T thought Dr T and 'Tannerman' might be one and the same and that their info was overlooked by GNR why they didn't then take it upon themselves to contact the 'Find Madeleine' site or contact their local police when back in UK?  One good reason they perhaps shied away from doing so was that they didn't want to get caught up in all the mania which I can understand.   
« Last Edit: September 14, 2019, 11:18:49 AM by Holly Goodhead »
Setting the pussy among the pigeons!