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

[faithlilly]

I think it is a valid point that seemingly is been rubbished by those who think that the police sketch artist should have drawn the sketch exactly as Tanner had described; leaving the detail of the pajama top out of the sketch. Going on what has been said, about accurate representation given by a witness, how should the police artist have drawn her then:
1. naked?
or.
2. in something she wasn't wearing when she disappeared?

Both 1 and 2 is not a true representation of what she looked like when she disappeared. Thus defying the purpose of a police sketch. 

Those who argue that the sketch artist was supposed to leave out the pajama top will have to give a reply by choose between 1 and 2. Failing to be able to give a reply with a choice between 1 or 2 would validate the point I have been making all along.   

The angle at which Tanner saw the child being carried should have been replicated exactly. If Tanner couldn't see the top half of the child's body then it should have been left out.

[icabodcrane]

Please provide proof that she "produced what they required". Your implication that she was corrupted to produce only what suited the McCann's is not only uncalled for but you have no evidence to support your claim. It's plain speculation with harmful intent.

I am merely pointing out what you were incorrectly implying  ...  that they were  'police'  sketches

They were not

This artist was given a remit by the McCanns and was paid for her services

[Mo Stache]

The angle at which Tanner saw the child being carried should have been replicated exactly. If Tanner couldn't see the top half of the child's body then it should have been left out.

A sketch without a top half of a child? Okay I will put that down as no. 3.

So you would have preferred the public be shown a 'half a child' just so that the angle of the child being carried was correct?  (oh dear!)

[Mo Stache]

I am merely pointing out what you were incorrectly implying  ...  that they were  'police'  sketches

They were not

This artist was given a remit by the McCanns and was paid for her services

Mr Grime and his dogs were freelance. Does the same priniciple you imply with the sketch artist, apply to them? The dogs were then employed to produce what the pj wanted them to?


 

[faithlilly]

A sketch without a top half of a child? Okay I will put that down as no. 3.

So you would have preferred the public be shown a 'half a child' just so that the angle of the child being carried was correct?  (oh dear!)

It would certainly have been more accurate.

[Mo Stache]

It would certainly have been more accurate.

But do you honestly think it would have been practical (and frankly laughable) to send out a 'half a child' sketch to the public? Thus eliminating no. 3 from the options leaving no. 1 and no. 2 to choose from.

So I repeat: I think it is a valid point that seemingly is been rubbished by those who think that the police sketch artist should have drawn the sketch exactly as Tanner had described; leaving the detail of the pajama top out of the sketch. Going on what has been said, about accurate representation given by a witness, how should the police artist have drawn her then:
1. naked?
or.
2. in something she wasn't wearing when she disappeared?

Both 1 and 2 is not a true representation of what she looked like when she disappeared. Thus defying the purpose of a police sketch. 

Those who argue that the sketch artist was supposed to leave out the pajama top will have to give a reply by choose between 1 and 2. Failing to be able to give a reply with a choice between 1 or 2 would validate the point I have been making all along.   
 

[faithlilly]

But do you honestly think it would have been practical (and frankly laughable) to send out a 'half a child' sketch to the public? Thus eliminating no. 3 from the options leaving no. 1 and no. 2 to choose from.

So I repeat: I think it is a valid point that seemingly is been rubbished by those who think that the police sketch artist should have drawn the sketch exactly as Tanner had described; leaving the detail of the pajama top out of the sketch. Going on what has been said, about accurate representation given by a witness, how should the police artist have drawn her then:
1. naked?
or.
2. in something she wasn't wearing when she disappeared?

Both 1 and 2 is not a true representation of what she looked like when she disappeared. Thus defying the purpose of a police sketch. 

Those who argue that the sketch artist was supposed to leave out the pajama top will have to give a reply by choose between 1 and 2. Failing to be able to give a reply with a choice between 1 or 2 would validate the point I have been making all along.   
 

I really don't see your problem. Tanner didn't see the top of the child and, because of the angle at which she/he was being carried, Tanner didn't think looked odd so why would replicating that pose be 'laughable' ?

[Mo Stache]

I really don't see your problem. Tanner didn't see the top of the child and, because of the angle at which she/he was being carried, Tanner didn't think looked odd so why would replicating that pose be 'laughable' ?

No you misread my post; a 'half a child' sketch would be laughable.
"But do you honestly think it would have been practical (and frankly laughable) to send out a 'half a child' sketch to the public?"

[icabodcrane]

Mr Grime and his dogs were freelance. Does the same priniciple you imply with the sketch artist, apply to them? The dogs were then employed to produce what the pj wanted them to?

 Let's stay on topic and continue the discussion

The sketch artist was employed by the McCanns

What was her remit ?  was it to  produce two different sketches of the men Jane Tanner and Gail Cooper saw,  each entirely independent of  the other ?

Or was it to produce two sketches which emphasised any similarities between the two men ? 

Why,  for instance,  were both men shown in the same  'pose'  (  one minus the child of course )   

I know the Jane Tanner sketch could  only depict the man as  'striding out'  because Jane only ever saw the man in motion

But why depict the man Gail Cooper saw as  'striding out'  ?  ... Mrs Cooper saw the man at close quarters and face on,  so why why do a sketch of him with a side-on perspective,  striding out,  unless  it was to draw some comparison with the man Jane saw  ? 

The artist was given an agenda with which to work,  in my opinion

[Mo Stache]

Let's stay on topic and continue the discussion

The sketch artist was employed by the McCanns

What was her remit ?  was it to  produce two different sketches of the men Jane Tanner and Gail Cooper saw,  each entirely independent of  the other ?

Or was it to produce two sketches which emphasised any similarities between the two men ? 

Why,  for instance,  were both men shown in the same  'pose'  (  one minus the child of course )   

I know the Jane Tanner sketch could  only depict the man as  'striding out'  because Jane only ever saw the man in motion

But why depict the man Gail Cooper saw as  'striding out'  ?  ... Mrs Cooper saw the man at close quarters and face on,  so why why do a sketch of him with a side-on perspective,  striding out,  unless  it was to draw some comparison with the man Jane saw  ? 

The artist was given an agenda with which to work,  in my opinion

It is on topic if you imply that the artist had an agenda and I used Mr Grime to argue my case that you could also be implying Grime could also be doing the same because you have no proof of her assumption/statement. You are questioning the artist integrity and I drew parallels to Mr Grime which is still on topic because we are discussing the artists integrity/agenda. You infer she had an agenda without proof, then that principle could also apply to others like Mr Grime. Do you not think the two sketches accurately depict any similarities between the two men? Is it your opinion that the reason for this is because the McCann's needed a detraction tactic? If so, why do you think this tactic was necessary? 

[icabodcrane]

It is on topic if you imply that the artist had an agenda and I used Mr Grime to argue my case that you could also be implying Grime could also be doing the same because you have no proof of her assumption/statement. You are questioning the artist integrity and I drew parallels to Mr Grime which is still on topic because we are discussing the artists integrity/agenda. You infer she had an agenda without proof, then that principle could also apply to others like Mr Grime. Do you not think the two sketches accurately depict any similarities between the two men? Is it your opinion that the reason for this is because the McCann's needed a detraction tactic? If so, why do you think this tactic was necessary?

Why do you think the artist did a sketch of the man Gail Cooper saw in profile,  in a striding out pose  ? 

[icabodcrane]

Another question

The McCanns believe the man the Smith family saw that night was the same man Jane Tanner saw almost an hour before  ...  correct  ?

So before they went public with the suggestion that  the moustachioed, buck- toothed man Gail Cooper saw  might have been the abductor,  did they have their private detectives run it past the Smiths  first ?  ...  did they show the Smiths the sketch of Gail Cooper's  creepy man and ask,   "Is this the man you saw that night ?"

I would guess they didn't,  given that the descriptions given by the Smith family, who, like Gail Cooper, saw the man face-on,  did not match her description in any way

[Angelo222]

Another question

The McCanns believe the man the Smith family saw that night was the same man Jane Tanner saw almost an hour before  ...  correct  ?

So before they went public with the suggestion that  the moustachioed, buck- toothed man Gail Cooper saw  might have been the abductor,  did they have their private detectives run it past the Smiths  first ?  ...  did they show the Smiths the sketch of Gail Cooper's  creepy man and ask,   "Is this the man you saw that night ?"

I would guess they didn't,  given that the descriptions given by the Smith family, who, like Gail Cooper, saw the man face-on,  did not match her description in any way

A good post Ica.          Tanner would have known instantly whether the guy in Gail Coopers photofit had any significance for her but has chosen to remain silent even though as you point out he is nothing like the man described by the smith family.  Martin Smith made the mistake of claiming that the man looked like Gerry yet Gerry is nothing like the gypsy type character witnesses by Cooper.

[Mrs. B]

I guess you wouldn't laugh if a survey had been done among the public after the publication of one of this grotesque sketches.

No, why would I? & why would a survey be done in the first place? Makes no sense whatsoever.

[Mo Stache]

Why do you think the artist did a sketch of the man Gail Cooper saw in profile,  in a striding out pose  ?

Could be that the "striding out pose" was conveyed to the sketch artist so she depicted him in that way. The best way to trigger someones memory is not only to show what they look like, but also to include a mannerism.