How likely is it that Jane Tanner and the Smiths saw the 'same' man ?

[Redblossom]

Madeleine's pyjama bottoms were not shorts, nor was the top long sleeved, Lace, as some have said.

***

DCI no one has said Madeleine wore long sleeved pyjamas. One of the Smiths said the child they saw wore such.

[Lace]

Madeleine's pyjama bottoms were not shorts, nor was the top long sleeved, Lace, as some have said.

***

DCI no one has said Madeleine wore long sleeved pyjamas. One of the Smiths said the child they saw wore such.

They looked like three quarter length shorts to me.

The man the Smith's saw could have had his arm across the arms of the child when carrying her,  making it impossible to see if the pyjama's were short sleeves.   

If then the person saw the top of the pyjama sleeves the person presumed they were long sleeves.

[AnneGuedes]

How she missed his handlebar moustache though but noticed the creases in his trousers....

Chamfort said a day without laughing is a lost one.

[faithlilly]

I don't have to,  it could happen.

You see Lace, that's why a proper, police reconstruction where these anomalies could be ironed out.

[Lace]

Chamfort said a day without laughing is a lost one.

Maybe he shaved it off?

[Benice]

The News of the World claimed the detailed artist's impression was generated using information from a holidaymaker, who had been staying 600 yards from the McCanns in Praia da Luz. The associate editor of the News of the world, Gary Thompson, told Sky News: "The real significance is that the sketch has been shown to Jane Tanner, a member of the so-called Tapas Group. "You may remember she says she saw a man carrying a child. "We understand that Jane Tanner has confirmed the likeness."

Yet she never saw the guys face...now that is an astounding even humendous ability!   




<sub>The language of Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns' public face, was unequivocal
as he addressed the media from a lectern in a London hotel. "Who is he? Where is
he? What, if any, is his connection to Madeleine's disappearance?" he said. "If he is
innocent, we want him to come forward for his own sake so he can be ruled out.
We believe this man could be linked to Madeleine's disappearance."




GAIL COOPER says she will never forget the day she stared into
the “dead eyes” of the man she believes abducted Madeleine McCann</sub>

I note it is Gary Thompson, an Assoc. Editor of the News of the World who says -  ''We understand that JT has confirmed the likeness'' which is a million miles away from saying.. ''We know JT has confirmed the likeness''.    From his choice of words I would say it's just another one of those dubious 'newspaper claims'.
IMO

[AnneGuedes]

And we wouldn't be here soliciting our imagination, sometimes too far.. had they not rejected..
Thinking the non involvement could have been established ! Would we be here ?

[Benice]

You see Lace, that's why a proper, police reconstruction where these anomalies could be ironed out.

They are obviously not anomalies in the eyes of the UK police, only in the eyes of some armchair sleuths - who have an agenda quite different to that of SY.
IMHO 

[Redblossom]

Chamfort said a day without laughing is a lost one.

how true!

[Redblossom]

Maybe he shaved it off?

yes maybe, still, *even* if that was the case, how can someone who didnt see a face  give such a high probability just from the hair, besides which one looks like they have been dragged backwards through a hedge and the other like they just came out of the hairdressers


!

[Redblossom]

I note it is Gary Thompson, an Assoc. Editor of the News of the World who says -  ''We understand that JT has confirmed the likeness'' which is a million miles away from saying.. ''We know JT has confirmed the likeness''.    From his choice of words I would say it's just another one of those dubious 'newspaper claims'.
IMO

Not a dubious claim

See here in the powerpoint presentations, scroll down

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

At least the words have been attributed to Jane Tanner, whether she said that or someone claims she said that from within Team Mccann, who knows
 >@@(*&)

[Benice]

Not a dubious claim

See here in the powerpoint presentations, scroll down

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

At least the words have been attributed to Jane Tanner, whether she said that or someone claims she said that from within Team Mccann, who knows
 >@@(*&)

Quote
After seeing the sketches  produced by Melissa Little with Gail Cooper, Jane Tanner believes that there is an 80% likelihood that this is the same man she saw carrying away the child believed to be Madeleine''
Unquote

That statement refers to ''sketches'' (plural) not just one picture of a man's face.  Those two witnesses would have given descriptions of the entire man, not just his face.  I've always thought that the 20 percent that Jane could not corroberrate was his face.

She also says that although she was happy with the picture of a man carrying a child which had been produced,  she was not happy with his face, and so it was blanked out.   That would concur with her rogatory statement in which she says she didn't see his face, only a side view of him.

[DCI]

Madeleine's pyjama bottoms were not shorts, nor was the top long sleeved, Lace, as some have said.

***

DCI no one has said Madeleine wore long sleeved pyjamas. One of the Smiths said the child they saw wore such.

Yes they have, on this forum somewhere!

[Redblossom]

Quote
After seeing the sketches  produced by Melissa Little with Gail Cooper, Jane Tanner believes that there is an 80% likelihood that this is the same man she saw carrying away the child believed to be Madeleine''
Unquote

That statement refers to ''sketches'' (plural) not just one picture of a man's face.  Those two witnesses would have given descriptions of the entire man, not just his face.  I've always thought that the 20 percent that Jane could not corroberrate was his face.

She also says that although she was happy with the picture of a man carrying a child which had been produced,  she was not happy with his face, and so it was blanked out.   That would concur with her rogatory statement in which she says she didn't see his face, only a side view of him.

so what was the 60% she could corroborate?

[Redblossom]

Yes they have, on this forum somewhere!

No dear, no they havent, dont waste your time looking either, *I* have made posts about it, but only in  the context of the Smith statements