The known facts and the speculations featuring Brueckner, the prime suspect

[sadie]

Hi Sadie, thanks for your reply.  As SY seem to be of the opinion that the man seen by JT was an innocent holiday maker I don’t see how they would be interested in the relative positions of Gerry or Jez at the time JT passed them, sorry.

Ah, that was under the command of DCI Andy Redwood.

From the interest shown in my folders on the Special Madeleine Crimewatch program, I think they are open minded. 

The father was coming from a different direction to Tannerman.  They are not the same man.  Jane is not doolally and she was not drunk.  There were two men out and about that evening, Dr Totman and Tannerman.


DS. Gary Redmond was the main officer that I talked with, after my being promoted from DC level to DS level.  I went several times taking folders and had more ready when I fell ill.  They never got sent and I sadly haven't a clue where they are now.

It is my understanding that at hands on level DS Gary Redmond is now running the investigation.  His interest in what I was telling them seemed very sincere - and I find it interesting that out of over 30 officers, he is now in charge.

He seemed very much on the ball and I wonder if he considers Dr Totman to be Tannerman?

What with
1) the wrong direction, [Modified to point out that whilst Totman was generally going easterly like Tannerman, he also was heading for the entrance to the car park of block 6.  This was to the south.   So Tannerman was walking more or less SE whilst Totman was walking E.S.E. and part facing Jane.}

2)  The wrong time

3) and the wrong pyjamas. 

Jeez, VS, were those PJays ever wrong !!!!  I can't believe that we were suckers enough to even think that they could be the same ones Jane described and Kate and Gerry showed.  They were so different.


The persistence of the Mccann disbelievers that they were higher up the road, reinforces my conviction that the position that Gerry and Jez stood is very important to them.  And they want fact changing so that Gerry was in sight, when he wasn't.

Had he been in sight, there would have been no abduction IMO


You are exceedingly intelligent:  Think about it

[G-Unit]

Interviews given by numerous witnesses who were ignored by the Portuguese police that have appeared in the media, I suppose you don’t consider that evidence?

It's very wek without more details such as when, where, which police force etc. In the case of the Totmans, for example, the PJ would have been very keen to talk to someone who claimed to be the innocent man seen by Jane Tanner.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It's very wek without more details such as when, where, which police force etc. In the case of the Totmans, for example, the PJ would have been very keen to talk to someone who claimed to be the innocent man seen by Jane Tanner.

All of those questions were answered in the interview given by the Totmans in the press I believe.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Ah, that was under the command of DCI Andy Redwood.

From the interest shown in my folders on the Special Madeleine Crimewatch program, I think they are open minded. 

The father was coming from a different direction to Tannerman.  They are not the same man.  Jane is not doolally and she was not drunk.  There were two men out and about that evening, Dr Totman and Tannerman.


DS. Gary Redmond was the main officer that I talked with, after my being promoted from DC level to DS level.  I went several times taking folders and had more ready when I fell ill.  They never got sent and I sadly haven't a clue where they are now.

It is my understanding that at hands on level DS Gary Redmond is now running the investigation.  His interest in what I was telling them seemed very sincere - and I find it interesting that out of over 30 officers, he is now in charge.

He seemed very much on the ball and I wonder if he considers Dr Totman to be Tannerman?
What with
1) the wrong direction,
2) the wrong time
3) and the wrong pyjamas. 

Jeez, VS, were those PJays ever wrong !!!!  I can't believe that we were suckers enough to even think that they could be the same ones Jane described and Kate and Gerry showed.  They were so different.


The persistence of the Mccann disbelievers that they were higher up the road, reinforces my conviction that the position that Gerry and Jez stood is very important to them.  And they want fact changing so that Gerry was in sight, when he wasn't.

Had he been in sight, there would have been no abduction IMO


You are exceedingly intelligent:  Think about it

I have thought about it Sadie.  What you suggest is a possibility though in my opinion not likely.  I find it hard to believe that the police would accept Totman was Tannerman unless they had also ascertained that Totman was walking in the same direction that JT claimed Tannerman was walking.  I also accept that I and they could be wrong.

[misty]

It's very wek without more details such as when, where, which police force etc. In the case of the Totmans, for example, the PJ would have been very keen to talk to someone who claimed to be the innocent man seen by Jane Tanner.

On the other hand, there may have been certain elements in the PJ who didn't want it known that the Totmans were in the vicinity at the relevant time and had perhaps seen something or someone they weren't meant to.
Two things concern me.
1. During the whole period between the filing of the investigation & SY becoming involved, which includes the McCann PI's & journalists, why did no-one ever question the lack of a completed LP questionnaire or any other information from a family whose child left the creche around 9pm? If a questionnaire was completed, what happened to it?
2. It's been suggested on several occasions that Dr Totman was, in fact, doubling back towards the creche because his wife was lagging behind with their son/had the apartment key/he'd dropped something. If that was indeed the case and without an appropriate explanation as to why he also carried his daughter back, what reason would there have been for Jez not seeing the Totmans as he made his way back to the same holiday Block 4?



As the above is all off-topic perhaps we could discuss CB's various reported alibis:-
a] CB wasn't in Portugal at the time.
b)CB can't remember where he was in May 2007 because it's too long ago.
c) CB's phone records, scrutinised by Fulscher, seem to provide CB with only a 90 sec window of opportunity for an abduction from 5A.
d) CB was travelling back from Tomar that evening (Nicole F's alleged statement)
e) CB was 30 mins away from Luz with an 18yr old German girl, his holiday fling for the week. This now-married woman appears to have  either ignored or been oblivious to the public appeals by BKA for information about CB between at least June & Dec 2020. Perhaps Mark Williams Thomas will provide us all with more information about both her & the various other witnesses who also reportedly can provide an alibi for CB.

[Brietta]

On the other hand, there may have been certain elements in the PJ who didn't want it known that the Totmans were in the vicinity at the relevant time and had perhaps seen something or someone they weren't meant to.
Two things concern me.
1. During the whole period between the filing of the investigation & SY becoming involved, which includes the McCann PI's & journalists, why did no-one ever question the lack of a completed LP questionnaire or any other information from a family whose child left the creche around 9pm? If a questionnaire was completed, what happened to it?
2. It's been suggested on several occasions that Dr Totman was, in fact, doubling back towards the creche because his wife was lagging behind with their son/had the apartment key/he'd dropped something. If that was indeed the case and without an appropriate explanation as to why he also carried his daughter back, what reason would there have been for Jez not seeing the Totmans as he made his way back to the same holiday Block 4?



As the above is all off-topic perhaps we could discuss CB's various reported alibis:-
a] CB wasn't in Portugal at the time.
b)CB can't remember where he was in May 2007 because it's too long ago.
c) CB's phone records, scrutinised by Fulscher, seem to provide CB with only a 90 sec window of opportunity for an abduction from 5A.
d) CB was travelling back from Tomar that evening (Nicole F's alleged statement)
e) CB was 30 mins away from Luz with an 18yr old German girl, his holiday fling for the week. This now-married woman appears to have  either ignored or been oblivious to the public appeals by BKA for information about CB between at least June & Dec 2020. Perhaps Mark Williams Thomas will provide us all with more information about both her & the various other witnesses who also reportedly can provide an alibi for CB.

I don't know if Brueckner gave the police an alibi in 2013 but I would imagine he did.  If so, I wonder if it tallies with the ones the documentary makers have uncovered.

[misty]

I don't know if Brueckner gave the police an alibi in 2013 but I would imagine he did.  If so, I wonder if it tallies with the ones the documentary makers have uncovered.

I guess he'd have said he hadn't any recollection of where he was or what he was doing on 3/5/07 and had no knowledge of what happened to Madeleine.

[sadie]

I have thought about it Sadie.  What you suggest is a possibility though in my opinion not likely.  I find it hard to believe that the police would accept Totman was Tannerman unless they had also ascertained that Totman was walking in the same direction that JT claimed Tannerman was walking.  I also accept that I and they could be wrong.

But from all reports, they weren't walking in totally the same direction, were they?

Tannerman carried on along the road going east, whilst Totman  had to swing right, in a southerly direction, to gain entrance to the car park of block 6 which led to his flat.  Totman would have been partially facing Jane as she was walking in a northerly direction.  Why didn't she see his face, she was only about 5 metres away accoding to one of her statements.  how come she saw the back of his head and his bottom rather than his front?


Jane didn't see Totman.  She saw Tannerman.

1)  They were walking in partially different directions
2)  The Pjays are totally wrong
3)  The time was wrong by about half an hour  Jane aint daft!
4)  Why is the image of Tannerman shown of his back when he was either sideways on or walking in a part southerly direction towards jane ?  Why didn't she see his face?


Jane didn't see Totman.  She saw Tannerman.  IMO.


Poor Jane.  How devastated she must be by everyone doubting her.





Good to see that at least you are keeping a bit of open mind about what we were talking about earlier yesterday.

[G-Unit]

On the other hand, there may have been certain elements in the PJ who didn't want it known that the Totmans were in the vicinity at the relevant time and had perhaps seen something or someone they weren't meant to.
Two things concern me.
1. During the whole period between the filing of the investigation & SY becoming involved, which includes the McCann PI's & journalists, why did no-one ever question the lack of a completed LP questionnaire or any other information from a family whose child left the creche around 9pm? If a questionnaire was completed, what happened to it?
2. It's been suggested on several occasions that Dr Totman was, in fact, doubling back towards the creche because his wife was lagging behind with their son/had the apartment key/he'd dropped something. If that was indeed the case and without an appropriate explanation as to why he also carried his daughter back, what reason would there have been for Jez not seeing the Totmans as he made his way back to the same holiday Block 4?



As the above is all off-topic perhaps we could discuss CB's various reported alibis:-
a] CB wasn't in Portugal at the time.
b)CB can't remember where he was in May 2007 because it's too long ago.
c) CB's phone records, scrutinised by Fulscher, seem to provide CB with only a 90 sec window of opportunity for an abduction from 5A.
d) CB was travelling back from Tomar that evening (Nicole F's alleged statement)
e) CB was 30 mins away from Luz with an 18yr old German girl, his holiday fling for the week. This now-married woman appears to have  either ignored or been oblivious to the public appeals by BKA for information about CB between at least June & Dec 2020. Perhaps Mark Williams Thomas will provide us all with more information about both her & the various other witnesses who also reportedly can provide an alibi for CB.

I have no idea what conspiracy theory you are hinting at in respect of the PJ, sorry.

What makes you think the Totman's questionnaire went missing?

Did Totman say he was doubling back, or is that an internet rumour?

MWT's programme will perhaps clear up the questions about Bruecker's whereabouts.

[Brietta]

I guess he'd have said he hadn't any recollection of where he was or what he was doing on 3/5/07 and had no knowledge of what happened to Madeleine.

It rattled him a bit though, or I don't think he would have mentioned it to his friends.  Unfortunately if he was the perpetrator it gave him plenty of notice if he had any loose ends to tie up.

[Anthro]

But from all reports, they weren't walking in totally the same direction, were they?

Tannerman carried on along the road going east, whilst Totman  had to swing right, in a southerly direction, to gain entrance to the car park of block 6 which led to his flat.  Totman would have been partially facing Jane as she was walking in a northerly direction.  Why didn't she see his face, she was only about 5 metres away accoding to one of her statements.  how come she saw the back of his head and his bottom rather than his front?


Jane didn't see Totman.  She saw Tannerman.

1)  They were walking in partially different directions
2)  The Pjays are totally wrong
3)  The time was wrong by about half an hour  Jane aint daft!
4)  Why is the image of Tannerman shown of his back when he was either sideways on or walking in a part southerly direction towards jane ?  Why didn't she see his face?


Jane didn't see Totman.  She saw Tannerman.  IMO.


Poor Jane.  How devastated she must be by everyone doubting her.





Good to see that at least you are keeping a bit of open mind about what we were talking about earlier yesterday.

Also Sadie, Jane said she watched Gerry and Julian Totman play tennis. I think she would have known what he looked like and would have pointed out that she saw him with the girl, instead of Tannerman (?)

[Brietta]

I have no idea what conspiracy theory you are hinting at in respect of the PJ, sorry.

What makes you think the Totman's questionnaire went missing?

Did Totman say he was doubling back, or is that an internet rumour?

MWT's programme will perhaps clear up the questions about Bruecker's whereabouts.

I don't think

• that Misty is 'hinting' at any 'conspiracy' theory.
  She is quite openly QUESTIONING the conduct of the investigating team with regard to material witnesses. I take it that is allowed.
• you are the one suggesting negligence on the part of Leicestershire police regarding questionnaires - I think it is for you to explain how it worked particularly for those holidaymakers not living in their catchment area.  Such as those returning from NI or like the Totmans, the South West

You constantly make reference to questionnaires.

My opinion is that anyone responding to local police requests for information would be holidaymakers returning from Luz around the time the McCann party would have been booked to come home and whom the Portuguese police did not have the time to question.

The Totmans did not come into that category of those whose travel arrangements interfered with the PJ investigation and apparently they did make a report at the time.  Amaral's docu made use of the information given although still not explaining the direction of travel. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9601.msg465981#msg465981
The Totmans remained in Luz long enough for the PJ to do the job of checking out the eight families using the creche that night.

We've got a whole thread on this topic.  Here's one I posted earlier on it  "the explanation for an investigative journalist getting hold of an individual's details is easily understood.

Paulo Reis "found" Dr Totman and published his name on his blog in 2009 in relation to quite another conspiracy theory all together." http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9601.msg465931#msg465931


I don't really think it is appropriate to rely on documentaries to 'solve' cases although the Netflix one came at the right time to open eyes just a little in Portugal.

I think it might have been more pertinent for the PJ to have checked out the criminal elements resident in Luz at the time.
Reading between the lines I think there was a bit of a panic going on, certainly frantic enough to attract the attention of Scotland Yard in 2013 regarding the phone dump.  Who knows what questioning that in the immediate aftermath days later might have led to.

Brueckner - who as far as the police were concerned, but apparently not his alibis - had vanished.  But might have revealed exactly what was happening with the registration of his vehicle.

Misty is a poster consistently making salient points which really should open up a bit of intelligent discussion on the forum.  What appears to me as consistent passive aggression in response doesn't really take us anywhere.  But heigh-ho

[G-Unit]

I don't think

• that Misty is 'hinting' at any 'conspiracy' theory.
  She is quite openly QUESTIONING the conduct of the investigating team with regard to material witnesses. I take it that is allowed.
• you are the one suggesting negligence on the part of Leicestershire police regarding questionnaires - I think it is for you to explain how it worked particularly for those holidaymakers not living in their catchment area.  Such as those returning from NI or like the Totmans, the South West

You constantly make reference to questionnaires.

My opinion is that anyone responding to local police requests for information would be holidaymakers returning from Luz around the time the McCann party would have been booked to come home and whom the Portuguese police did not have the time to question.

The Totmans did not come into that category of those whose travel arrangements interfered with the PJ investigation and apparently they did make a report at the time.  Amaral's docu made use of the information given although still not explaining the direction of travel. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9601.msg465981#msg465981
The Totmans remained in Luz long enough for the PJ to do the job of checking out the eight families using the creche that night.

We've got a whole thread on this topic.  Here's one I posted earlier on it  "the explanation for an investigative journalist getting hold of an individual's details is easily understood.

Paulo Reis "found" Dr Totman and published his name on his blog in 2009 in relation to quite another conspiracy theory all together." http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=9601.msg465931#msg465931


I don't really think it is appropriate to rely on documentaries to 'solve' cases although the Netflix one came at the right time to open eyes just a little in Portugal.

I think it might have been more pertinent for the PJ to have checked out the criminal elements resident in Luz at the time.
Reading between the lines I think there was a bit of a panic going on, certainly frantic enough to attract the attention of Scotland Yard in 2013 regarding the phone dump.  Who knows what questioning that in the immediate aftermath days later might have led to.

Brueckner - who as far as the police were concerned, but apparently not his alibis - had vanished.  But might have revealed exactly what was happening with the registration of his vehicle.

Misty is a poster consistently making salient points which really should open up a bit of intelligent discussion on the forum.  What appears to me as consistent passive aggression in response doesn't really take us anywhere.  But heigh-ho

According to page 8 of the strategic debrief, Leicestershire police developed and used a questionnaire for ALL UK citizens who were resident in the holiday resort around the time Madeleine went missing. Completed questionnaires were received from 559 individuals.

Those questionnaires would surely have revealed where those individuals (and their children) were during the evening of 3rd May.

If the Totmans spoke to the GNR as they claimed, that means that they knew about Jane Tanner's sighting almost immediately. That suggests that the secrecy rule was broken almost immediately. I also wonder why the Totmans didn't speak to the McCanns, their representatives or perhaps John Hill. Imo all those people could have attracted the attention of the PJ for them.

I see no point in speculating about Brueckner's possible alibi. He either has one or he doesn't, and if MWT has found something it will be revealed in time.

I would appreciate it if you could restrict yourself to discussing the content of my posts rather than sharing your opinions about my motives and intentions.

[jassi]

According to page 8 of the strategic debrief, Leicestershire police developed and used a questionnaire for ALL UK citizens who were resident in the holiday resort around the time Madeleine went missing. Completed questionnaires were received from 559 individuals.

Those questionnaires would surely have revealed where those individuals (and their children) were during the evening of 3rd May.

If the Totmans spoke to the GNR as they claimed, that means that they knew about Jane Tanner's sighting almost immediately. That suggests that the secrecy rule was broken almost immediately. I also wonder why the Totmans didn't speak to the McCanns, their representatives or perhaps John Hill. Imo all those people could have attracted the attention of the PJ for them.

I see no point in speculating about Brueckner's possible alibi. He either has one or he doesn't, and if MWT has found something it will be revealed in time.

I would appreciate it if you could restrict yourself to discussing the content of my posts rather than sharing your opinions about my motives and intentions.

 

[sadie]

Also Sadie, Jane said she watched Gerry and Julian Totman play tennis. I think she would have known what he looked like and would have pointed out that she saw him with the girl, instead of Tannerman (?)

A very good point.  Well spotted Anthro.  On the ball as usual.

.................

P.S.    I have modified my words about direction in my original post on this subject; I wasn't clear before.