Jane Tanner's interview with The Sun on 20 November 2007

[debunker]

If Gerry had his back even half turned to her then he might not have seen her.  And I on't suppose that Gez Wilkins actually knew her.  But it's a bit odd that her description, albeit a bit vague, does somewhat match The Smiths, seen not much long after.
It's the fault of The PJ that it had no face.  They couldn't do Side Images, apparently.

Why does him not knowing her mean she's invisible?  What a ridiculous statement.

Registration of memory is very complicated. Noone has total recall.

THere will always be conflict between statements about the same events, exclusikns anf false inclusions.

If the Portuguese prosecutor could not make a case from the PJ files, what hope is there for a bunch of biased hate filled [ censored word ]s.

[C.Edwards]

There are discrepancies of interpretation of statements by both sides.

Is that supposed to count as a debate on the points raised?  You're very, very predictable in how you shy away from inexplicable things that put the McCanns in a bad light. Not just you, either.  These "minor discrepancies" as the pros describe them are the things that have made the police very, very suspicious of the whole McCann story.  I know you choose not to believe that, that's not a problem to me at all. :-)

[C.Edwards]

If the Portuguese prosecutor could not make a case from the PJ files, what hope is there for a bunch of biased hate filled [ censored word ]s.

Yeah... you're so neutral it hurts. 

[debunker]

If the Portuguese prosecutor could not make a case from the PJ files, what hope is there for a bunch of biased hate filled [ censored word ]s.

Yeah... you're so neutral it hurts. 

I am neutral between McCann criminality, abduction and woke and wand erred.

I also despise hate filled[ censored word ]s seeking to circumvent individual rights, and most of those are onthe ant-mccann side ofthe debate.

ENd of.

[C.Edwards]

End of what? 

I hate sycophantic apologists who fail to understand there is nothing that rules out the McCanns as being involved in the disappearance of Madeleine.  Even the Portuguese authorities and Leicestershire police agree with this.

Yes, abduction was possible. All sorts of things were possible.  Just because no-one comes up with what everyone accepts as a plausible timeline for accidental death doesn't mean it can't have happened. Implausible things happen all the time - even abductions.

[Eleanor]

There are discrepancies of interpretation of statements by both sides.

Is that supposed to count as a debate on the points raised?  You're very, very predictable in how you shy away from inexplicable things that put the McCanns in a bad light. Not just you, either.  These "minor discrepancies" as the pros describe them are the things that have made the police very, very suspicious of the whole McCann story.  I know you choose not to believe that, that's not a problem to me at all. :-)

Okay. Your rite.  Have you told The Portuguese Prosecutor and Scotland Yard?  Can we expect an arrest at any moment?

[C.Edwards]

Okay. Your rite.  Have you told The Portuguese Prosecutor and Scotland Yard?  Can we expect an arrest at any moment?

"your rite"?  Nice work.

I don't need to tell them. They know.  "at any moment"?  Theoretically, yes.  The problem the police have is lack of hard evidence.  They pretty much know what happened, they just know they can't prove it with the evidence they currently have.  Sorry, the ADMISSIBLE evidence they currently have ;-)

[Eleanor]

Okay. Your rite.  Have you told The Portuguese Prosecutor and Scotland Yard?  Can we expect an arrest at any moment?

"your rite"?  Nice work.

I don't need to tell them. They know.  "at any moment"?  Theoretically, yes.  The problem the police have is lack of hard evidence.  They pretty much know what happened, they just know they can't prove it with the evidence they currently have.  Sorry, the ADMISSIBLE evidence they currently have ;-)

Oh, Boo Hoo.  Sorry about that.  I thought we might have a Lynching.

[C.Edwards]

This is still bugging me... C.Edwards what's your view?

I have no view. I have no idea what Gerry McCann is or isn't trying to achieve by contradicting Tanner and Wilkins' statements.  Maybe in his mind it makes it more plausible that an abduction happened as it places him further from the back gate? History is riddled with criminals that think they know more than the police yet are caught out by stupid lies or invented stories.  I'm not saying that the McCanns fall into that category but it's feasible.  You're assuming there was a collusion involving Tanner, or assuming, at least, that all [ censored word] believe that.

[faithlilly]

It would seem like a very odd decision of Gerry McCann's to "destroy the credibility" of the only person who claims to have seen the abduction in process, if that was the plan they had all cooked up together.

AGreed.

But Gerry did so by putting himself on the other side of the road, even though Tanner and Wilkins gave signed
statements to a completely different scenario. So do you think Gerry was mistaken in his recollection ?

Well what other explanation is there?  You seem to prefer the explanation that fellow co-conspirators were intent on destroying each other's credibility.   What do you think their rationale was for that?

So you believe Gerry was wrong in his recollection and that he was on the apartment side of the road which involved the impossibility of Tanner passing without either man having seen her ?

[faithlilly]

If Gerry had his back even half turned to her then he might not have seen her.  And I on't suppose that Gez Wilkins actually knew her.  But it's a bit odd that her description, albeit a bit vague, does somewhat match The Smiths, seen not much long after.
It's the fault of The PJ that it had no face.  They couldn't do Side Images, apparently.

No matter which way you place them, either McCann or Wilkins would have seen and heard Tanner pass unless, of course, they were on the other side of the road. Gerry knew this and sacrificed the only witness to the abductions credibility to rescue his own.

[debunker]

If Gerry had his back even half turned to her then he might not have seen her.  And I on't suppose that Gez Wilkins actually knew her.  But it's a bit odd that her description, albeit a bit vague, does somewhat match The Smiths, seen not much long after.
It's the fault of The PJ that it had no face.  They couldn't do Side Images, apparently.

No matter which way you place them, either McCann or Wilkins would have seen and heard Tanner pass unless, of course, they were on the other side of the road. Gerry knew this and sacrificed the only witness to the abductions credibility to rescue his own.

Mind reading again.

[faithlilly]

@ Debunker

Not mind reading just a sensible appraisal of the known facts

@ Martha

Saving their own skin ?

[debunker]

@ Debunker

Not mind reading just a sensible appraisal of the known facts

@ Martha

Saving their own skin ?

I am talking about clear facts that are rejected by [ censored word]:

Eddie reacts only to cadaver odor, not blood.
Evidence was found of Madeleine's DNA in the Scenic
Scent dogs never alert falsely
Errors instatements are necessarily lies,
There was sufficient evidence to charge the McCanns with any criminal offence,

And so on.

[faithlilly]

It seems your comprehension isn't what it should be so I'll explain more fully.

Tanner agreed ( and until we know the full story we can only guess why ) to say she saw Gerry talking to Wilkins just before she saw a man with a child walking away from the direction of the apartments. The story was detailed in the timeline agreed by the group, including Tanner and the McCanns, and was handed into the PJ on the 10th of May. On the same day Gerry was questioned and no doubt having been made aware that the PJ were sceptical of his claim that he didn't see Tanner while talking to Wilkins, added veracity to it by saying he had crossed over to the other side of the road therefore making the scenario more plausible. Of course if Tanner was then found out to be liar in the future he would also have distanced himself from her lie as he had not claimed to have seen her.

Tanner didn't try to save her own skin, she was metaphorically thrown under the nearest bus by her supposed friend Gerald McCann.