Gerry and Jez chat while Jane walks by. Seconds later she spots Tannerman!

[sadie]

That's impossible Jez is facing her and didn't see anyone on the street and I can't believe she wouldn't say anything when passing within a couple of feet. You must be able to hear her on quiet deserted street walking past. My first thought was she may have seen the man crossing before she got to them and turned left onto the lane.

Passing within a couple of feet?  First of all the image doesn't really show where Gerry and Jez stood.

http://i.imgur.com/Ud6y15w.jpg?2-Tanner_sighting_07


 John very kindly put that image up for me and having bothered him too much with several images, I felt thta I shouldn't pester him any more.    I let it go with that image, thinking at that stage that it was near enough.  Now, I realise that clearly it wasn't !
. 
In fact Gerry and Jez were at the corner on the alleyway, as you call it lane.  Gerry was on the kerb and Jez was in the road with the pushchair.[which if I remember correctly was pointing downhill towards the tapas reception]


That exact position where they chatted, has earlier been disected, very well analysed and well discussed and based upon
1)  Jezes full description, in his full statement which is very clear.
2)  His plan of where it was 
3)  Janes determined insistence against Gerry in the cutting edge video
the consensus was that Gerry and Jez were on the alleyway corner and NOT at 5A gate.
Please can we get that right Pf.

The pavement was 2 metres wide and on the corner of the alleyway even wider, so where does the 2 feet come from?

I have already just dealt with the nonsense about flip flops in a previous post. 
Jane would not have been wearing rubber / plastic flip flops to dinner.  She aint any ordinary scrubber, ya know.  In quality structured flip flops, her footsteps could have been near silent

I would say that when I spoke with Gerry it was possible to recognize someone I knew who was passing on foot at the crossing at the top of the hill or to describe approximately someone unknown from that distance.

Where does the above statement come from?  I dont recognise it.  Would be grateful if you would point me to it in the files.  Thanks.

As Gerry and Jez were over 30 metres = 100 feet approx. away from where Tannerman crossed the road at the top of the hill, I find it extreemly difficult to believe that Jez said that .  The lighting wasn't brilliant and 100 feet is a long way away even in the daylight.

Where did those words come from Pf ?

Q. Relative to whether I know Jane Tanner;
Now I know her name, description of the clothes and photos which I have seen in the press. At that time I knew of her as a member of the group but did not know her name. I do not remember having seen her when I spoke with Gerry,  ..snip ..(JW)



"He was adamant that he did not see any one else in the area. When spoken to in reference to Jane Tanner walking by, he again stated that he saw no one. He also stated that he did not see or hear anyone to his right. ...snip...   The conversation with Gerry lasted for about three minutes during which Gerry was chatty and in his normal self. Jeremy then made his way back to his apartment."

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm

Little wonder thta he didn't see Tannerman at about 100 feet away

Now, Jane, he didn't see her either .. nor did Gerry.  Well Gerry had his back to Jane, but Jez was opposite Gerry.  In an early post Heribert Janosch, our highly qualified professional investigator, informed us thta our periferal vision was only about 40^ on either side of the direction we were looking***.  If Gerry was looking at Jez or down at Jezes little one then Jane would have been at the margins or beyond his periferal vision.  In other words he would not see her.

Jez however was more likely, but again if he was looking at Gerry then for most of her walk Jane would have been out of his periferal vision.  If he were looking down into the buggy, he certainly would not have seen Jane as she came closer but may have seen a figure in the distance ... and she just didn't register.  He didn't really know her and IIRC she was in a huge fleece/ anorak belonging to Russell, who I understand is a giant of a man.  As an amorphus, probably navy blob, I doubt that he would notice her at all especially if the conversation was lively.



*** I am remembering about 40^.  Please correct me if I am wrong.

[Brietta]

Passing within a couple of feet?  First of all the image doesn't really show where Gerry and Jez stood.  John very kindly put that image up for me and having bothered him too much with several images I let it go with that image, thinking at that stage that it was near enough.  Now, I realise that clearly it wasn't !
. 
In fact Gerry and Jez were at the corner on the alleyway as you call it lane.  Gerry was on the kerb and Jez was in the road with the pushchair.[which if I remember was pointing downhill towards the tapas reception]


That exact position has been very well analysed and well discussed and based upon
1)  Jezes full description, in his full statement which is very clear.
2)  His plan of where it was 
3)  Janes determined insistence against Gerry in the cutting edge video
the consensus was that Gerry and Jez were on the alleyway corner and NOT at 5A gate.

Please can we get that right Pf.

The pavement was 2 metres wide and on the corner of the alleyway even wider, so where does the 2 feet come from?
I have already dealt with the nonsense about flip flops in a previous post, just.  Jane would not have been wearing rubber / plastic flip flops to dinner.  She aint any ordinary scrubber, ya know.  Her footsteps could have been near silent

Where does this come from?  I dont recognise it.  Would be grateful if you would point me to it in the files.  Thanks.

As Gerry and Jez were over 30 metres = 100 feet approx. away from where Tannerman crossed the road at the top of the hill, I find it extreemly difficult to believe that Jez said that .  The lighting wasn't brilliant and 100 feet is a long way away even in the daylight.

Where did those words come from Pf ?

Little wonder thta he didn't see Tannerman at about 100 feet away

Now, Jane, he didn't see her either nor did Gerry.  Well Gerry had his back to Jane, but Jez was opposite Gerry.  In an early post Heribert Janosch, our prfessional investigator, informed us thta our periferal vision was only about 40^ on either side of the direction we were looking.  If Gerry was looking at Jez or down at Jezes little one then Jane would have been at the margins or beyond his periferal vision.  In other words he would not see her.

Jez however was more likely, but again if he was looking at Gerry then for most of her walk Jane would have been out of his periferal vision.  If he were looking down into the buggy, he certainly would not have seen Jane as she came closer but may have seen a figure in the distance ... and she just didn't register.  He didn't really know her and IIRC she was in a huge fleece/ anorak belonging to Russell, who I understand is a giant of a man.  As an amorphus, probably navy blob, I doubt that he would notice her at all especially if the conversation was lively.



I am remembering 40^.  Please correct me if I am wrong.

Good post, Sadie.

I don't see what the problem is. 

Jane Tanner left the table appx. ten minutes after Gerry McCann.

If Gerry McCann had not stopped on his way back to talk with Jez Wilkins he and Jane would probably have passed - and would have seen - each other en route possibly somewhere around the reception area.

Jane returned to the restaurant appx. five minutes after leaving, Gerry McCann was back before her.

The men just did not see her, simple as that ... and Sadie has given good reasons for that.

Where else would she have been other than where she said and where else would Gerry and Jez have been within the given time scale?

The claims that Jane Tanner lied about seeing a man with a child have been put to rest, so why is the truth of the rest of her statement still being questioned?   

[faithlilly]

Good post, Sadie.

I don't see what the problem is. 

Jane Tanner left the table appx. ten minutes after Gerry McCann.

If Gerry McCann had not stopped on his way back to talk with Jez Wilkins he and Jane would probably have passed - and would have seen - each other en route possibly somewhere around the reception area.

Jane returned to the restaurant appx. five minutes after leaving, Gerry McCann was back before her.

The men just did not see her, simple as that ... and Sadie has given good reasons for that.

Where else would she have been other than where she said and where else would Gerry and Jez have been within the given time scale?

The claims that Jane Tanner lied about seeing a man with a child have been put to rest, so why is the truth of the rest of her statement still being questioned?

So you don't believe Gerry crossed over the road to talk to Jez ?

Good because I don't either.

As to sadie's post. 

' At this time he was walking on the right side of the road passing the Tapas bar area to his left. He noticed the bad street lighting and although it was not completely dark there was enough light to see clearly. As he approached the corner of the McCanns apartment, he saw Gerry appear from the area of the gate. He crossed the road and engaged in general conversation with Gerry. At this time they were stood with Gerry's back to the building near to the gate and Jeremy facing him. Rua Dr Agostino was about 10-15 meters to his right and the pathway leading to the front of the apartment blocks about 5 meters to his left.'

SNIP

'they were stood with Gerry's back to the building near to the gate'

And

'the pathway leading to the front of the apartment blocks ( the place sadie insists Gerry and Jez were standing ) about 5 metres ( 16.404 ft ) to his left'

I trust that clears things up once and for all.

[misty]

So you don't believe Gerry crossed over the road to talk to Jez ?

Good because I don't either.

As to sadie's post. 

' At this time he was walking on the right side of the road passing the Tapas bar area to his left. He noticed the bad street lighting and although it was not completely dark there was enough light to see clearly. As he approached the corner of the McCanns apartment, he saw Gerry appear from the area of the gate. He crossed the road and engaged in general conversation with Gerry. At this time they were stood with Gerry's back to the building near to the gate and Jeremy facing him. Rua Dr Agostino was about 10-15 meters to his right and the pathway leading to the front of the apartment blocks about 5 meters to his left.'

SNIP

'they were stood with Gerry's back to the building near to the gate'

And

'the pathway leading to the front of the apartment blocks ( the place sadie insists Gerry and Jez were standing ) about 5 metres ( 16.404 ft ) to his left'

I trust that clears things up once and for all.

Does it say if they were in the road or on the pavement talking?

[pathfinder73]

Does it say if they were in the road or on the pavement talking?

Crossing the road means getting to the other side. So Gerry would be on the pavement and Jez would be in close proximity not in the middle of the road with a pram.

[faithlilly]

Does it say if they were in the road or on the pavement talking?

'From what I remember, the conversation happened right there on the pathway '

Jez Wilkins rogatory statement.

[misty]

Crossing the road means getting to the other side. So Gerry would be on the pavement and Jez would be in close proximity not in the middle of the road with a pram.

Gerry could have stepped off the pavement into the road also. It's an instinctive thing to want to stand at the same level as the person with whom you are conversing.
So, Jane walked along the pavement, up past some parked cars.....

[pathfinder73]

Gerry could have stepped off the pavement into the road also. It's an instinctive thing to want to stand at the same level as the person with whom you are conversing.
So, Jane walked along the pavement, up past some parked cars.....

Nope that never happened according to Jez. I would put the pram on the pavement like most normal people.

[misty]

Nope that never happened according to Jez. I would put the pram on the pavement like most normal people.

There would not have been sufficient room on the pavement to do that. Gerry was stood with his back to the gate, not sideways on.

[Alice Purjorick]

Being a saddo I once plotted all this out to scale , as near as possible, from statements made etc.
Jane and Jez don't agree to where Jez and Gerry stood to within 4 metres and Gerry thought he and Jez were on the opposite side the road about 10 metres away.
Taking all that into consideration one could reasonably say all three protagonists once stood inside a rectangular space of about 40 m² 
One can see why a reconstitution might have helped.

[Alfred R Jones]

Being a saddo I once plotted all this out to scale , as near as possible, from statements made etc.
Jane and Jez don't agree to where Jez and Gerry stood to within 4 metres and Gerry thought he and Jez were on the opposite side the road about 10 metres away.
Taking all that into consideration one could reasonably say all three protagonists once stood inside a rectangular space of about 40 m² 
One can see why a reconstitution might have helped.

Assuming JT never stopped walking perhaps you should also have calculated the length of time she spent within the 40 square metres?

[misty]

Assuming JT never stopped walking perhaps you should also have calculated the length of time she spent within the 40 square metres?

Alice would need to factor in the type of flip flops JT was wearing as the cheap sort hinder walking speed.

[Alfred R Jones]

Alice would need to factor in the type of flip flops JT was wearing as the cheap sort hinder walking speed.

Also, the gradient of the pavement, being uphill would slow her down too, not to mention how much food and drink she had consumed by this point.

[Alice Purjorick]

Well if we work on information contained within statements we have three adults, two male and one female and a baby in a buggy occupying at max a 40m² area any time between 20:45 and 21:15. About 15 to 20 metres further up the road was another male adult moving west to east, carrying a child. The adult carrying the child did not give a statement to which we are party. Of the others:
Two of the adults (one m one f) say they were all on the west side of the street one (m) says the two male adults were on the east of the street.
The two male adults saw neither the one carrying the child nor the female passing by.
The female adult says she passed by the two male adults with the baby not speaking to them and then saw the male adult with the child crossing the road at the junction ahead of her. She says he was moving west to east.
So what really happened? Any takers?
How long it took the female to traverse any distance and whether her footwear was haute qualite by Philippe Ferlop or knock offs from Solly down Romford market is of not much relevance.

[pathfinder73]

If they standing where Gerry said they be under the light. Crecheman would be able to see them before he crossed the road and the yard would've asked him.