Could you please address this point Silky -
how did JT know that a man passed Apartment 5A carrying a small female child at 9.15pm, one who bore a striking resemblance to the man that SY later identified, if she hadn't been where she said she was that night?
I have never, ever said Tanner didn't see a man carrying a child.
What I HAVE said, is that Tanner did NOT see Tannerman carrying Madeleine, that night or any other.
The night creche was open, and the sight of a parent carrying a sleeping child home is something she had probably witnessed several times over that holiday.
You don't need my thoughts on Tannerman though - Andy has clearly told us yes, there was a man, but his sighting is not RELEVANT.
He hasn't told us if mystery dad actually DID walk through that street that night, now did he?
He told us mystery dad walked from the night creche to his apartment with his child. Not when, not where, not WHAT TIME.
This information should be right there, in the Creche records.
Also, the individual Tanner claims to have seen was going the opposite direction to Smithman, an entire 45 minutes earlier.
And of course there remains the GINORMOUS anomaly that a "checking" parent actually witnessed one of her party's children being abducted, and said NOT A WORD until well into the next day.
Heck, she claims she DID see it, yet didn't raise an alarm, an eyebrow, or even tell anyone until hours later.
Oh and? If you tell the truth, your version remains the same. Tanner embroidered her sighting, it became ever more clear with each telling. His hair grew, his face became pockmarked (even though she didn't claim to SEE his face).
If her story was true, it would be "I saw the abductor take Madeleine and said/did NOTHING" or, it would be "I saw the abductor take Madeleine, I didn't see anything but his back".
The story would not change and grow over the retelling, as it has done. Truth is boring and remains the same no matter how many times you're asked to repeat it.
