The Cracked Mirror.

[DCI]

So you can't contemplate O'Brien, Payne and Oldfield lying but you can insinuate that Murat and his mother were.

Where have I insinuated Murat and his mother lied?

Yes, didn't Amaral tell him, he would get him?

One little niggle I have, is,  Murat lives in a seperate house to his mother, so how would she know his every move?

They don't live in the same house, hows that a lie?

[AnneGuedes]

So what did she mean by, *I just thought that it was?*

Must admit its very hard to make head or tail what she is talking about from that rogatory script. She is obviously saying at some stage she thought it was him, is she referring to him being there that night? like the others had? Or is she referring to him as the man she saw with a child?

And do you think Mr Amaral when writing about the van surveillance exercise with Bob Small, he totally fabricated the words *she recognised him from the way he walked*?

She hardly could have recognised him by a face she had erased.
The way he walked... The way he carried..

[Redblossom]

She hardly could have recognised him by a face she had erased.
The way he walked... The way he carried..

Good point Anne.

[AnneGuedes]

This guy spent some time near the G5, spoke fluent English and Portuguese and used glasses.

[DCI]

She hardly could have recognised him by a face she had erased.
The way he walked... The way he carried..

4078 “Right. And when you first became aware of this man holding the child, if you can try and picture in your mind, as I am sure you have done over and over again, and start from the top of his head and work your way down and tell me what he looked like?”

Reply “You see this is where now I’m really, I don’t even know whether it’s worth doing this, because there’s been so much, since then I’ve had the, when they took me round for the surveillance to look at, and I’m guessing now it’s MURAT they wanted me to look at and, you know, all the other bits and bobs, I really don’t know, but I think I’d prefer just to stick with what I said in my original statement, in terms of the, because even, I mean, this is coming back to the sketch, even when I did the sketch, by that stage, you know, things were, were murky, I needed to that sketch that first night, I mean, they took me in to do the sketch, but they only had, erm, front facing software, so you know, and at that point I said, you know, is there, can I do, because the clothes and everything was the thing was the thing that was the most in my mind then and I can remember saying to the chap I met on the stairs earlier, I think it’s (inaudible), is it?”


4078 “Yeah”.

Reply “Because he took me in the car back and forth and I can remember saying to him on the way back ‘Look, is there a way I can do a sketch with clothes, you know, do you have software or any way that I can do a sketch of the clothes or a side, a side view’. And he sort of said ‘No, we don’t have that feasible, you know, feasibility or availability’. And I said then ‘Can I do that when I go back to the UK’, you know, because at that point it was in my head and it would have been, and they were the bits that I think would have been recognisable to get down on paper. But at that point it was like ‘Oh no, we can’t do that, we don’t work in that way’. Which I can understand and, you know, now obviously I think ‘Oh I should have pushed and really pushed’, but at that point you rely on, you don’t, you know, you’re just in such shock and you just think ‘Okay that’s the way things do’, but”

4078 “Yeah”.

Reply “But, I mean, I think, so the things that I’m happy, that are still in my head, that still stick in my head is the hair and it was longer, it was sort of longish and, erm, I don’t know how to (inaudible), but each, each, almost the hair was long, the bits of hair were long, so it was long into the neck, you know, sort of in, when people have a number one or whatever at the back and it’s shaved, not shaved up, but, you know, sort of layered up, this was more long into the neck, so sort of long, each, each individual hair was long, erm, and dark, it was sort of quite dark and glossy, that sticks in my head. And sort of the dark, dark clothes and quite billowy, not billowy clothes, but quite baggy, sort of they seemed, erm, not ill fitting but quite baggy clothes, like not jeans, but trousers sort of not Chinos but not Farrahs either, but sort of baggy’ish sort of ill fitting more than. And they’re the bits that I remember quite vividly sort of”.

[Benice]

So what did she mean by, *I just thought that it was?*

Must admit its very hard to make head or tail what she is talking about from that rogatory script. She is obviously saying at some stage she thought it was him, is she referring to him being there that night? like the others had? Or is she referring to him as the man she saw with a child?

And do you think Mr Amaral when writing about the van surveillance exercise with Bob Small, he totally fabricated the words *she recognised him from the way he walked*? Or was it a total misunderstanding?

IMHO Red, I think its possible she hadn't actually finished saying what she going to say before the police officer started talking again  - but we can't tell that from the typed statement.   She might have been going to say for instance  ''I just thought that it was.... important that I told Bob Small..''  or even ''I just thought it was ...possible that it might have been Murat if the others saw him and he was now on TV' '   but that's pure guesswork on my part.   

I agree it's not easy to follow the verbatim statements, because we can't see their facial  expressions or hear the intonation of their voices, and without that it's easy to get the wrong idea.    However, the police officer interviewing her wouldn't have that  problem and I'm sure that if she thought Jane Tanner was saying she thought Murat was the man she saw, then she would undoubtedly have questioned her further about that.  But she didn't - she carried on talking about the others seeing Murat.

Yes I'm sure Amaral lied.  If Jane Tanner had identified Murat - then she would have immediately been taken to the police station to make a signed statement.     The policemen with her would not have been ringing Amaral to ask if she needed to go in to sign anything - they would already know the answer to that question.   They would be ringing to say she'd positively identified him and they were bringing her in.    No way if she HAD identified Murat as the abductor would she have been told she didn't need to sign anything, and that she could go home.

I've never been sure whether Bob Small was actually in the van with her.  I'm not saying he wasn't - I've just never personally seen anything in the files to say that he was.
 
 
 

[Benice]

Would you so easily speculate a similar kind of protection given for the good cause in respect of Ms Tanner ? Could you imagine she erased the face of the carrier because that face looked like Mr McCann's one and she just couldn't imagine Mr McCann abducting his own child ?
The good cause here would be to prevent the police from being misled.
So she 1) erases the face, 2) chooses for her (real) sighting a time when Mr McCann was chatting with an independent witness and 3) changes the direction from East to West into West to East.

No I don't.  I do believe that a mother would stretch the truth a little for her own son, particularly if knew he was innocent and she feared for his wellbeing at the hands of the PJ.    I don't believe JT would lie and take such a dangerous risk with her own and her family's future, for someone she hardly knew and was not in any way close to.

[Benice]

Yes, didn't Amaral tell him, he would get him?

One little niggle I have, is,  Murat lives in a seperate house to his mother, so how would she know his every move?

But wasn't she his alibi for that night - IIRC she said he was sitting in her kitchen? (I might have got that bit wrong)

[faithlilly]

Where have I insinuated Murat and his mother lied?

They don't live in the same house, hows that a lie?

This is what Jenny Murat says about that night :

'--- Asked, she explains that while they were talking in the kitchen, she is not able to say when, she recalls having heard a siren ringing at least once. Although not usual, she also did not "connect" because it could possibly have been an ambulance. (She recalls that sometimes, when the wind blows in a certain direction, it is possible to hear in the house sirens of police cars or ambulances that pass on the EN125).
--- Questioned, she says that during that night she also heard no noise or strange movements of people and also no one knocked on the door to ask or to request help to find the missing girl.
---Asked, she assures that her son Robert did not leave the house that night. Furthermore, she says that he usually gets up first. On that day she does not remember if that was what happened.'

He was in his mother's house all night,  that is what she categorically stated in her statement, so implying that Robert may have been somewhere else is indeed casting doubt upon the veracity of her statement.

Bottom line is either Robert and his mother are lying or Oldfield, Payne and O'Brien are. There is no other option.

[Rachel Granada]

No I don't.  I do believe that a mother would stretch the truth a little for her own son, particularly if knew he was innocent and she feared for his wellbeing at the hands of the PJ.    I don't believe JT would lie and take such a dangerous risk with her own and her family's future, for someone she hardly knew and was not in any way close to.

Your point about Jane Tanner is something that I have tried again and again to get my head round and just cannot for the life of me see how someone who didn't know the McCanns and wasn't close to would risk serious charges by participating in a cover up.

I can't see any of the holiday party risking serious charges to cover up a child's death. 

[DCI]

This is what Jenny Murat says about that night :

'--- Asked, she explains that while they were talking in the kitchen, she is not able to say when, she recalls having heard a siren ringing at least once. Although not usual, she also did not "connect" because it could possibly have been an ambulance. (She recalls that sometimes, when the wind blows in a certain direction, it is possible to hear in the house sirens of police cars or ambulances that pass on the EN125).
--- Questioned, she says that during that night she also heard no noise or strange movements of people and also no one knocked on the door to ask or to request help to find the missing girl.
---Asked, she assures that her son Robert did not leave the house that night. Furthermore, she says that he usually gets up first. On that day she does not remember if that was what happened.'

He was in his mother's house all night,  that is what she categorically stated in her statement, so implying that Robert may have been somewhere else is indeed casting doubt upon the veracity of her statement.

Bottom line is either Robert and his mother are lying or Oldfield, Payne and O'Brien are. There is no other option.

Well you tell me, who's lying  8-)(--)

2-Processo Vol II pages 442 to 447

Relating to R.J.Q.E.Murat it was determined:

1. he lives at Casa Liliana ..... Lagos;
2. at the same address but in a separate house lives his mother J.A.Murat;

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ROBERT-MURAT.htm

[Benice]

This is what Jenny Murat says about that night :

'--- Asked, she explains that while they were talking in the kitchen, she is not able to say when, she recalls having heard a siren ringing at least once. Although not usual, she also did not "connect" because it could possibly have been an ambulance. (She recalls that sometimes, when the wind blows in a certain direction, it is possible to hear in the house sirens of police cars or ambulances that pass on the EN125).
--- Questioned, she says that during that night she also heard no noise or strange movements of people and also no one knocked on the door to ask or to request help to find the missing girl.
---Asked, she assures that her son Robert did not leave the house that night. Furthermore, she says that he usually gets up first. On that day she does not remember if that was what happened.'

He was in his mother's house all night,  that is what she categorically stated in her statement, so implying that Robert may have been somewhere else is indeed casting doubt upon the veracity of her statement.

Bottom line is either Robert and his mother are lying or Oldfield, Payne and O'Brien are. There is no other option.

Thanks for that info. Faith.

[Albertini]

You are just twisting her words - or their meaning - to suit your agenda.  The simple fact is that she DID NOT identify Murat, no matter how much you might wish she had.

You've taken that comment out of context.  They were talking about the others seeing Murat on the 3rd and that comment was in relation to that conversation.

 Jane's immediate comment before that was''I don't think it was him that I saw''.    So it makes no sense for her to contradict herself in the next sentence.

If the interviewing police officer thought that comment was Jane saying she thought Murat was the man she saw carrying away a child -  then the line of questioning immediately following would have reflected that - and in some depth too.   The fact that it didn't should tell you that you've drawn the wrong conclusions from the comment.

The only person who has claimed JT identified Murat as the abductor is Amaral - and that was a downright lie.

I am not twisting anything. I am looking at and explaining precisely what Ms Tanner has actually said.

It is perfectly obvious what she is saying when you consider the tense she uses in the verb "think".

"Think" is present tense, in other words, as she is sat there giving that Rogatory statement in 2008 she does not think it was him now.

"Thought" is past tense, in other words at some point in the past, and given the question she answered was related to the van episode episode, it is safe to conclude that she thought then on that night in 2007 in what  it was him.

So through the use of her words if she thought it was him when she was in the van she identified him. One thing is for sure Leicestershire Police will have a record of it.

Chinagirl, not only have you failed to rebut my explanation of her comments, you have failed to provide any explanation whatsoever of this apparent contradiction in Ms Tanner's words.

Benice if Amaral was wrong why did Ms Tanner, Bob Small Or Leciestershire Police never seek to challenge his words?

To both of you, it is not me who is desperate to twist her words. It is actually the supporters of the McCann's who have bet the ranch on Ms Tanner's sighting being genuine that any (more) damage to her credibility blows her sighting out of the water and the abduction with it.

[Albertini]

Appears to me she is now just going with the flow....path of least resistance and all that.   She obviously had her suspicions at one stage for whatever reason but clearly also indicated that he wasn't bundleman.

Or you could conclude that on that night in May 2007 in the van she identified him as bundleman, but then in 2008 when giving the Rogatory statement and it was obvious it wasn't him she said she didn't think it was him.

What does that say about her credibility as a witness when you add the fact that she could see this abductor and what he, and the child he was carrying was wearing, but she said she walked past Gerry & Jez who were actually on the other side of the road.

Given she is the only witness to the abduction scenario her testimony is incredibly unreliable.

[Albertini]

So can I get this straight then.   Is she saying that she just thought it was him but now thinks it isn't???   8-)(--)

That's precisely what it means. I have explained how she skirted around it in the Rogatory interviews because she knew there was a record of that surveilience van episode (so far unreleased), so she could not outright deny she had ID'd him in the van, but what she said in the Rogatory interviews was more centred on the fact that she didn't think it was him now (or in 2008 when the rogatories were recorded).