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

[Redblossom]

Sadie, I did not say Jane Tanner was at the alleyway when she said she spotted the man, did I? In my post I asked about times and distances that could be travelled by Jane Tanner whilst the man hurried away! I will ignore your question about a 'come on' and comments about me understanding or not.

In Jane Tanner's statement, she says she saw the man just after passing the others. If it was exactly when she passed the others, then she could not have been at the top of the road, could she?

Meanwhile a man appeared ( * ) carrying a child (**), with a hurried walk, it being this detail together with the fact that the child dressed in pyjamas, without being wrapped up in a blanket, that caught her attention. She only managed to see him from the side, with the child in his arms. She noticed the individual's presence exactly when she had just passed by Gerry and Jez who were talking, having seen this person step off the pavement that borders on the apartment block where they were staying and rapidly cross the road.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm

[Redblossom]

Icabrodcane, that is a very good point. IMO if a street is deathly quiet as described by Gerry Mccann and others, if someone walks right past you, whether you see or look at them or not, you would hear and sense them.  Neither Mr Wilkins nor Gerry Mccann said anything to this effect. They said they didn't see Jane Tanner. They may have been aware though that someone walked past them at the time.
 >@@(*&)

[John]

Icabrodcane, that is a very good point. IMO if a street is deathly quiet as described by Gerry Mccann and others, if someone walks right past you, whether you see or look at them or not, you would hear and sense them.  Neither Mr Wilkins nor Gerry Mccann said anything to this effect. They said they didn't see Jane Tanner. They may have been aware though that someone walked past them at the time.
 >@@(*&)

Sorry, have missed out on several points...

That's very true what you say Redblossom, Jez confirms that Gerry had his back to the footpath so would not have identified anyone passing behind him.

Jane Tanner observed the man some seconds and some 25+ metres after having passed Gerry and Jez as she approached the junction of the two roads.   She refers to the man with longish hair carrying a child as being about 10 metres in front of her and walking across her path from left to right.

The reference to the pram being in the middle of the road is nothing odd.  This was a night when hardly anything stirred in the twilight.

[Redblossom]

John, how many seconds would it take Jane Tanner to walk 25 metres? How do you know this is when she saw the man? How many metres wide is the distance from left to right where the man walked? if he was almost in na run how many seconds would it take him to be out of sight? Why does her first statement say she saw him exactly after passing the two men?

Edited.
I have just skimmed through Jane Tanner's rogatory interview and seen that she says she was getting to the top of the road before she spotted the man. If this is true, why did she say in her first statement it was exactly after passing the two men?

I tend to take people's first statements as more truthful than further ones, which can be altered for a variety of reasons. And she is not the only member of that party that did this.

Well, I have been on this forum half the day, so shall take my leave. Thank you to everyone for all the discussion today.

[icabodcrane]

Agreed, which translates as this...     Could Tanner still have passed by in the semi darkness?

You could add the passing figure of Jane Tanner to the picture ...  at the exact moment all three were horizontal to each other

That would give us an idea of whether she could have passed by entirely unnoticed by either men

Could you do that please John  ?  (  add the figure of Jane Tanner at the moment she passed both men ) 

If it's not too much trouble,  I think it might be helpful to the debate


Amended image as requested - John

[John]

I have amended the image as requested.

The following is taken from Wilkins' statement...

He walked around the main area of the resort and eventually ended up in the Tapas bar where he used the toilet facility. He was unable to state what time this was. His son was still awake so he walked in the area of the ocean club gardens and walked along the alleyways in that general area. He eventually made his way along Rua Dr Francisco toward the direction of Rua Dr Agostinho. 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.

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


More play on words here.  What Wilkins actually means is as he approached the corner of the wall at the McCanns apartment.  So there you have it, the visual representation isn't far wrong.

In the twilight and under the artificial lighting which exists, Gerry and Jez had no way of seeing a man walk across the top of the street carrying a child moments later, they were just too far from the junction.

[icabodcrane]

Agreed, which translates as this...     Could Tanner still have passed by in the semi darkness?

You could add the passing figure of Jane Tanner to the picture ...  at the exact moment all three were horizontal to each other

That would give us an idea of whether she could have passed by entirely unnoticed by either men

Could you do that please John  ?  (  add the figure of Jane Tanner at the moment she passed both men ) 

If it's not too much trouble,  I think it might be helpful to the debate


Amended image as requested - John

Thanks John 

...  any particular reason she is scraping up against the wall like that, as far away as possible from the two men   ?   

[faithlilly]

@ John

Funnily enough your graphic shows very well why it would have been impossible for Wilkins and Gerry not to see Tanner if they were all stood on the pathway as Tanner and Wilkins describe.


If you look at the family at the top of the photograph you can see by the two figures at the back just how much room two people take up on the narrow pavement and how impossible it would have been for Tanner to 'slip by ' unnoticed.

Faithlilly, at the corner where Jez drew them chatting, the pavement is almost 2 metres wide.  Higher up, where those
people are, it is only about 1.3/1.4 metres wide.   Plenty of room to pass on such a wide pavement

Doncha think?

Check it on GEarth

Yes, the pavement isn't what you call "narrow", 1m80 I would say.

What shocks me is the pushchair in the middle of the road. No father instinctively would do that, no matter cars passing by or not. Usually you keep a eye (or the possibility to keep an eye) on your kid, even if sleeping.

As I said look at the individuals just back from the corner in John's graphic and you will see how narrow it is.

[John]

Yes, the footpath widths varies continuously from about 1.8m to about 1.1m at its narrowest.  Here is a better view of the footpath alongside apartment 5a.

[faithlilly]

@ John

You are constantly misrepresenting what Wilkins, and indeed Tanner, says. Wilkins says he was on the pavement and Gerry was near to the gate with his back to it. He does not say he was in the edge or middle of the road, that is your interpretation.

It really does make you wonder what the standard of debate is like in other sections of this forum if you are representative of the standard of comprehension.

[faithlilly]

Yes, the footpath widths varies continuously from about 1.8m to about 1.1m at its narrowest.  Here is a better view of the footpath alongside apartment 5a.

And as you can see it was narrowest just where Wilkins, and Tanner, say he and Gerry was standing.

[John]

Now now Faithlilly, lets keep to the facts.

Remind me, where did he say he was standing on the footpath?

Wilkins says Gerry had his back to the building, not against it.

[Carana]

 4078    “How far away from you were they at the closest point?”

Reply    “Phew, as, I mean, it’s hard to, sort of thing, but I think I was sort of halfway, it’s probably sort of five metres, I mean, I’m trying to sort of think in terms of this room, but sort of probably just further than that wall, probably sort of five to ten metres id’ say, if, I don’t know how far it is to there, but”.

 

4078    “I would say probably about, I am just guessing, but two and a half to three metres?”

Reply    “Yeah, I’d probably say sort of five, five to ten metres, well probably five, nearer five”.

 

4078    “So about as far away again the other side of the wall as you are from this side?”

Reply    “Yeah, yeah, probably, yeah, sort of, as when I first, when I first saw them”.

 

4078    “I don’t know why I was looking over there, it’s like I was (inaudible)”.

Reply    “I know.  But, yeah, I’d say probably, and then obviously I was walking as they were walking, so it would have probably, I don’t know whether it would have gone less or, but, I mean, I wasn’t like staring, you know, it was sort of like a”.

078    “A passing interest, yeah?”

Reply    “Yeah”.

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

[John]

So to bring this to a conclusion, Wilkins told Leicestershire Police on the 7 and 11 May 2007 that...

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.

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



Much later on 8 April 2008, Wilkins made this comment in his rogatory statement to LEICESTERSHIRE POLICE.

I remember seeing Gerry on the other side of the same. I believe that there was some speculation in the press regarding the circumstances of this encounter. I remember that I crossed the street to talk to Gerry. According to what I remember, Gerry was walking when I spotted him. As I mentioned previously, I assumed that he had gone to check on the children and was headed back to the Tapas Bar.
From what I remember, the conversation happened right there on the pathway but I am not certain who was located exactly where.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS-ROGATORY.htm


So now lets see...

Gerry must have been below the gate to the patio for him to assume he had come from that direction and in addition Gerry was walking when he saw him.   Thus Gerry had to have closed the patio gate and was heading back to the tapas bar.  This most definitely doesn't put Gerry with his back to the apartment wall.

[AnneGuedes]

Much later Wilkins made this comment in his rogatory statement to LEICESTERSHIRE POLICE.

I remember seeing Gerry on the other side of the same. I believe that there was some speculation in the press regarding the circumstances of this encounter. I remember that I crossed the street to talk to Gerry. According to what I remember, Gerry was walking when I spotted him. As I mentioned previously, I assumed that he had gone to check on the children and was headed back to the Tapas Bar.
From what I remember, the conversation happened right there on the pathway but I am not certain who was located exactly where.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS-ROGATORY.htm


So now lets see...

Gerry must have been below the gate to the patio for him to assume he had come from that direction and in addition Gerry was walking when he saw him.   Thus Gerry had to have closed the patio gate and was heading back to the tapas bar.  This most definitely doesn't put Gerry with his back to any wall.

JW had a feeling GMC was coming from his flat, but actually didn't see him getting out of the gate.
Please John, put one of them on the pavement, at least the pushchair. It looks like they purposely leave the pavement empty for Jane.
The pavement looks narrow on this view, but in reality it is not and two persons may cross easily. One could cross two persons side by side, without having trouble not to touch the others.