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

[Lyall]

Yes, indeed. Smithman is important, but not for the reason you believe.

&%+((£ Interesting. Tell us more, misty.

[misty]

&%+((£ Interesting. Tell us more, misty.

Wrong thread for that. 

[Lyall]

Wrong thread for that. 

[Eleanor]

 

[Alfred R Jones]

I'd be interested to hear how you explain the anomaly of the two unconnected men both carrying children with no warm covering and no shoes on a chilly May evening. Surely even for you that's a coincidence too far ?

I can't explain it adequately (though surely if one father goes to collect a sleeping child from the creche, a child who has been sleeping in bed with no shoes on, then surely it is not beyond all reason that other sleeping children might be collected in the same manner..?) - unlike you I don't profess to having all the answers, however I do reject the notion that JT lied about the sighting on Gerry's orders.

[pathfinder73]

Jane could've passed them without being seen  *&*%£

[Benice]

I don't care Jane didn't pass Jez. He was adamant about that! He saw her when he first left not when he was chatting to Gerry. She didn't pass him! She may have turned left down the lane because as she said she would've said something to Gerry if she passed him about the football and you can't mistake his voice.

Jez was not adamant Jane didn't pass him.     He was adamant he didn't see anyone else i.e. JT or Crecheman. That's not the same thing at all. 

I would bet my house on the fact that if Jez was asked if he thought JT had lied about seeing him and Gerry - he would say ''definitely not'.       Primarily  IMO because he would not be able to think of a single  reason why she would do such a dangerous thing  - unless she was off her rocker.   Clearly that was not the case. 

If she didn't pass them - then how did she know they were there? 

The only person who could have told her was Gerry.  When did he do this?   And why having apparently persuaded her to lie - did he then deny seeing her.   That makes no sense.     And would Russel  have agreed that it was fine and dandy for the mother of his children to perjure herself to the police as if this was no big deal?!.    Not a chance IMO.

The fact that they all have different recollections of what was a very insignificant couple of minutes in their lives  at the time - and which only took on any importance later on is perfectly normal - according to the experts.

The whole idea that JT decided to lie for Gerry only works in conspiracy land IMO - and even then - as with so many of the conspiracy theories in this case -  it first requires the complete removal of all semblance of logic, common sense and reasoned thought from the equation.  For example, there needs to be at least one credible reason/motive for why JT would agree to lie in the first place - and there isn't one.
IMHO

[pathfinder73]

Jez was not adamant Jane didn't pass him.     He was adamant he didn't see anyone else i.e. JT or Crecheman. That's not the same thing at all. 

I would bet my house on the fact that if Jez was asked if he thought JT had lied about seeing him and Gerry - he would say ''definitely not'.       Primarily  IMO because he would not be able to think of a single  reason why she would do such a dangerous thing  - unless she was off her rocker.   Clearly that was not the case. 

If she didn't pass them - then how did she know they were there? 

The only person who could have told her was Gerry.  When did he do this?   And why having apparently persuaded her to lie - did he then deny seeing her.   That makes no sense.     And would Russel  have agreed that it was fine and dandy for the mother of his children to perjure herself to the police as if this was no big deal?!.    Not a chance IMO.

The fact that they all have different recollections of what was a very insignificant couple of minutes in their lives  at the time - and which only took on any importance later on is perfectly normal - according to the experts.

The whole idea that JT decided to lie for Gerry only works in conspiracy land IMO - and even then - as with so many of the conspiracy theories in this case -  it first requires the complete removal of all semblance of logic, common sense and reasoned thought from the equation.  For example, there needs to be at least one credible reason/motive for why JT would agree to lie in the first place - and there isn't one.
IMHO

I've provided you with a theory on how she could have seen them but not passed them. Read my posts.

[faithlilly]

I can't explain it adequately (though surely if one father goes to collect a sleeping child from the creche, a child who has been sleeping in bed with no shoes on, then surely it is not beyond all reason that other sleeping children might be collected in the same manner..?) - unlike you I don't profess to having all the answers, however I do reject the notion that JT lied about the sighting on Gerry's orders.

That's right, you can't explain it adequately. That is because there is no adequate explaination.

[Benice]

I've provided you with a theory on how she could have seen them but not passed them. Read my posts.

I've read your theory that she turned up the lane/alley at the back of the apartment block - but that would mean her patio doors were unlocked  - which they weren't.    As she always took the longer route across the car-park - I think she would definitely have remembered the one occasion she took a different route.   So I don't think your theory works.

The fact that she could give an estimate of the distance Crecheman was away from her at one point (15ft?) also confirms that she did not turn into the alley/lane  IMO.

[pathfinder73]

I've read your theory that she turned up the lane/alley at the back of the apartment block - but that would mean her patio doors were unlocked  - which they weren't.    As she always took the longer route across the car-park - I think she would definitely have remembered the one occasion she took a different route.   So I don't think your theory works.

The fact that she could give an estimate of the distance Crecheman was away from her at one point (15ft?) also confirms that she did not turn into the alley/lane  IMO.

It's the only way if she didn't pass them to get to the car park at the front.

[Lyall]

Jez was not adamant Jane didn't pass him.     He was adamant he didn't see anyone else i.e. JT or Crecheman. That's not the same thing at all. 

I would bet my house on the fact that if Jez was asked if he thought JT had lied about seeing him and Gerry - he would say ''definitely not'.       Primarily  IMO because he would not be able to think of a single  reason why she would do such a dangerous thing  - unless she was off her rocker.   Clearly that was not the case. 

If she didn't pass them - then how did she know they were there? 

The only person who could have told her was Gerry.  When did he do this?   And why having apparently persuaded her to lie - did he then deny seeing her.   That makes no sense.     And would Russel  have agreed that it was fine and dandy for the mother of his children to perjure herself to the police as if this was no big deal?!.    Not a chance IMO.

The fact that they all have different recollections of what was a very insignificant couple of minutes in their lives  at the time - and which only took on any importance later on is perfectly normal - according to the experts.

The whole idea that JT decided to lie for Gerry only works in conspiracy land IMO - and even then - as with so many of the conspiracy theories in this case -  it first requires the complete removal of all semblance of logic, common sense and reasoned thought from the equation.  For example, there needs to be at least one credible reason/motive for why JT would agree to lie in the first place - and there isn't one.
IMHO

There most certainly is. Panic.

You make a good point about recollections inevitably being different, even after only a few hours. But your forget the factor everyone knows about but forgets to mention: whatever the circumstances of Madeleine's disappearance, those 9 people (8 if we take DW out) were super-stressed that night - and during the next days.

[Benice]

There most certainly is. Panic.

You make a good point about recollections inevitably being different, even after only a few hours. But your forget the factor everyone knows about but forgets to mention: whatever the circumstances of Madeleine's disappearance, those 9 people (8 if we take DW out) were super-stressed that night - and during the next days.

What would JT be in such a panic over that would prompt her to agree to tell such a massive lie to the police and risk being charged with perjury, perverting the course of justice and ending up in a Portuguese jail.    What was she so scared of?

It couldn't be their child checking arrangements - because that is the first thing the group told the police about and made no attempt to hide it. 

So what else could it be?

[Alfred R Jones]

That's right, you can't explain it adequately. That is because there is no adequate explaination.

Just as you are unable to provide an adequate reason for JT supposedly lying about her sighting, at least I admit it  whereas you are stubbornly attached to your theory, despite the fact it is ridiculously far-fetched.

[Lyall]

What would JT be in such a panic over that would prompt her to agree to tell such a massive lie to the police and risk being charged with perjury, perverting the course of justice and ending up in a Portuguese jail.    What was she so scared of?

It couldn't be their child checking arrangements - because that is the first thing the group told the police about and made no attempt to hide it. 

So what else could it be?

If we knew everything that happened that night then we might be able to attempt to answer that question, but we only know a fraction of the night's events. But a child has gone missing; initially they of course assume she'll soon be found, but slowly realise she may not be. A child has gone missing and they have absolutely no way of proving they (and their partners) aren't involved i.e. they know they're all suspects. Who wouldn't panic in such a situation?