Tannerman & the blanket

[Mr Gray]

I wonder why anyone would debate translation errors when the original document TYPED BY DAVID PAYNE IN ENGLISH is in the files?
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm

I think you need to accept THE FACT that what I have said is true, Sadie. Jane Tanner changed her mind!!!!

do you have two conflicting statements by tanner in english...otherwise you are stating your opinion as fact...again

[G-Unit]

do you have two conflicting statements by tanner in english...otherwise you are stating your opinion as fact...again

Yes.

[sadie]

Jane said they weren't there, they were stood just up the hill.

I wonder why anyone would debate translation errors when the original document TYPED BY DAVID PAYNE IN ENGLISH is in the files?
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm

I think you need to accept THE FACT that what I have said is true, Sadie. Jane Tanner changed her mind!!!!

I think that you both are accepting a non verbatim report of what the very agitated Jane was saying.  That report was a useful document, but Janes input appears to have been messed up.  It is what they call  "Chinese Whispers".

Jane very clearly and definitely shows where Gerry  and Jezes chat took place on the Cutting Edge video 


Cutting Edge Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkc3C6csaHI  @ 10.00 .......

[The General]

I think that you both are accepting a non verbatim report of what the very agitated Jane was saying.  That report was a useful document, but Janes input appears to have been messed up.  It is what they call  "Chinese Whispers".

Jane very clearly and definitely shows where Gerry  and Jezes chat took place on the Cutting Edge video 


Cutting Edge Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkc3C6csaHI  @ 10.00 .......

So which bits of Jane's statement are to be relied upon? None of it? Some of it? Or are all of the initial statements to be discarded?

[sadie]

So which bits of Jane's statement are to be relied upon? None of it? Some of it? Or are all of the initial statements to be discarded?

What Gunit quoted was not a statement; it was a time line assembled by a third party and what Jane was supposed to have said was non verbatim and might even have been given originally by Rob O Brien as an intermediary in her abscence.  We just don't know, do we ?   If so, there is another opportunity for Chinese whispers

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm

You undoubtedly know that such a non-verbatim document would have no legal standing in a Court of Law because of the Chinese Whispers element.


There are three solid pieces of evidence that Gerry and Jez chatted in the kerb / road area which was adjacent the pavement of the Alleyway.  Why deny them and demean them ?  They are the FACTS.

[Eleanor]

What Gunit quoted was not a statement; it was a time line assembled by a third party and what Jane was supposed to have said was non verbatim and might even have been given originally by Rob O Brien as an intermediary in her abscence.  We just don't know, do we ?   If so, there is another opportunity for Chinese whispers

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm

You undoubtedly know that such a non-verbatim document would have no legal standing in a Court of Law because of the Chinese Whispers element.


There are three solid pieces of evidence that Gerry and Jez chatted in the kerb / road area of the pavement of the Alleyway.  Why deny them and demean them ?  They are the FACTS.

Any excuse for a bit of prejudicial discourse.

[The General]

There are three solid pieces of evidence that Gerry and Jez chatted in the kerb / road area of the pavement of the Alleyway.  Why deny them and demean them ?  They are the FACTS.

Maybe they are the facts.
And if we use the same logic, using the statements, we get this (paraphrased): Jane left the Tapas bar at between 9:05 and 9:10 pm, five minutes after Gerry (according to the timings). She walked past the 2 men whilst they were talking. Immediately after passing the two men Jane states that she saw a man carrying a child along the road across the top of the street, from left to right.  The child was being carried flat, across the forearms, and Jane Tanner saw its feet, which were towards her. She then continued to her own apartment.
Are these also the facts?

[Mr Gray]

What Gunit quoted was not a statement; it was a time line assembled by a third party and what Jane was supposed to have said was non verbatim and might even have been given originally by Rob O Brien as an intermediary in her abscence.  We just don't know, do we ?   If so, there is another opportunity for Chinese whispers

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm

You undoubtedly know that such a non-verbatim document would have no legal standing in a Court of Law because of the Chinese Whispers element.


There are three solid pieces of evidence that Gerry and Jez chatted in the kerb / road area of the pavement of the Alleyway.  Why deny them and demean them ?  They are the FACTS.

As there's no evidence against the mccanns sceptis need to make some up

[Wonderfulspam]

As there's no evidence against the mccanns sceptis need to make some up

That's not strictly true.

What about the witness who claimed to see Kate & Gerry carrying a big black bag & acting suspiciously?

Is their account not evidence?

Kate herself admitted it was.

[Mr Gray]

That's not strictly true.

What about the witness who claimed to see Kate & Gerry carrying a big black bag & acting suspiciously?

Is their account not evidence?

Kate herself admitted it was.

are all the sightings of maddie evidence

[Angelo222]

As there's no evidence against the mccanns sceptis need to make some up

Depends what you mean by "evidence against".  I would suggest there is a load of evidence in relation to activities post disappearance.

I would also add that Kate McCann's reluctance to cooperate fully with the police is viewed as pretty damning too.

[Mr Gray]

Depends what you mean by "evidence against".  I would suggest there is a load of evidence in relation to activities post disappearance.

i know...and I think its rubbish

[Wonderfulspam]

are all the sightings of maddie evidence

All witness statements are evidence, obviously.
Whether they are true or not is a different matter.

[Mr Gray]

All witness statements are evidence, obviously.
Whether they are true or not is a different matter.

precisely...tahts why I normally sa y...real evidence...as opposed to evidence...theres no real evidence against te
he mccanns. any claim re witnesses claiming to have seen gerry have no more validity than the sighting of maddie in the petrol station

[Wonderfulspam]

precisely...tahts why I normally sa y...real evidence...as opposed to evidence...theres no real evidence against te
he mccanns. any claim re witnesses claiming to have seen gerry have no more validity than the sighting of maddie in the petrol station

That's not what you said though, you said 'no evidence', so I win.