SY claim the man Tanner saw had collected his child from the night creche ?

[Redblossom]

These images were put together by the McCanns private detectives  ?

(  I assumed Scotland Yard had done them recently  ) 

Why didn't the McCanns show them to the public   ?

Alot of people assumed that...also that one had been age progressed! ..Jon Snow on C4 news yesterday said SY came across them in the PI files where they had been laying for five years..and had not been passed to the PJ.....programme may be on c4 on demand

Jumping back to the SYman I find it amazing that Redwood said the pyjamas which the two year old was wearing at the time bore an uncanny similarity to the ones Madeleine was wearing...this whilst showing a wooly long sleeved orange top and bright  blue bottoms with pink flowers and a thick orange stripe....plus what looks like a white blanket by them??what was that about....

Its on the CW video around 22 mins  , Ive stuck it in the video library

[pinkblossoms]

There seems to be a lot of news,is there anywhere I could watch last nights crime watch program, i missed it.

[Cariad]

There seems to be a lot of news,is there anywhere I could watch last nights crime watch program, i missed it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyJwns_MTok

With thanks to Sadie on another thread.

Welcome by the way 

[Angelo222]

The pros really must learn to listen.  Redwood didn't say that Tannerman or bundleman was eliminated from the investigation.  He didn't have to fill in all the gaps for us to be able to read between the lines. 

The British tourist only thought it might have been him, he was in no way certain.  If Redwood was 100% sure of this if would have come across in the show.  All we are left with now is even more questions and uncertainties.

I personally feel that SY are walking a very fine line by promoting a theory on the basis of a maybe or a possibly.

[Kazcutt]

Whats a pro? Professional?
He wanted us to think it was him he was wearing the brown shoes beige trousers and blue jacket

[jassi]

The pros really must learn to listen.  Redwood didn't say that Tannerman or bundleman was eliminated from the investigation.  He didn't have to fill in all the gaps for us to be able to read between the lines. 

The British tourist only thought it might have been him, he was in no way certain.  If Redwood was 100% sure of this if would have come across in the show.  All we are left with his us even more questions.

If Redwood wasn't sure of the man's identity as Tannerman why mention him at all?

[pinkblossoms]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyJwns_MTok

With thanks to Sadie on another thread.

Welcome by the way 

Thank you much appreciated*

[Angelo222]

I went to the trouble to transcribe exactly what Redwood said....

From Redwood talking about the crèche....

"Eight families had left 11 children in there and one particular family we spoke to gave us information which was really interesting and exciting, in fact I would say it was a revelation moment when having discussed with them what they were doing on the night they themselves believed they could be the Tanner sighting."

A could be was ... A REVELATION MOMENT!

Isn't that what the show was billed on?

Why didn't he get Tanner to identify him or has she failed to do so?

[Victoria]

I went to the trouble to transcribe exactly what Redwood said....

From Redwood talking about the crèche....

"Eight families had left 11 children in there and one particular family we spoke to gave us information which was really interesting and exciting, in fact I would say it was a revelation moment when having discussed with them what they were doing on the night they themselves believed they could be the Tanner sighting."

A could be was ... A REVELATION MOMENT!

Isn't that what the show was billed on?

Why didn't he get Tanner to identify him or has she failed to do so?

He's said a lot more than that today. He's said it's compelling and they believe confidently the man can be eliminated.

[Rachel Granada]

There seems to be a lot of news,is there anywhere I could watch last nights crime watch program, i missed it.

Welcome pinkblossoms. 

[sika]

LMAO at this "bash amarals detective work" thread.
How can we be sure that SY are not telling porkies about debunking Tanners bundle man?

Seems a bit convenient that this man finally comes forward anonymously in what is the most high profile 'alleged child abduction' case.
Do people seriously still think bundle man exists?
Or are SY perhaps playing Tanner at her own game, knowing that her sighting was a deliberate attempt to divert attention from the real sighting which is provided by independent witnesses, and possibly implicates her friend Gerry.

i think that you have summed it up perfectly.

How can we be sure of anything? Probably best to stop all the wild speculation and false presumptions.

[Sherlock Holmes]

I agree we cannot hypothetico-deduce the quality of the investigation through the CW show.
The number of e-fits and the call for more suspects could be a trick to protect Madeleine as they in fact know who is Mr Right but haven't been able to locate him.
But was it necessary to say Mr Innocent was coming from the creche ? And was it necessary to exhibit a map with flushing flags as if his route was the normal one ? Must people be cheated to react the right way ? Or the less they know the better ?

It is a bit of a mystery, I would certainly agree.

TBH one of the most striking features of the programme was the speed with which the information was presented. Most of it concerned itself with a kind of mini emotional odyssey of he McCanns. The 'factual' part, to which members of the public are being asked to repond, went very very quickly. Many suspects / POIs and their whereabouts were listed in quick succession in a very short space of time.

I find it hard to imagine that someone unfiliar with the minutiae of the case would even register that the man formerly known as bundleman (!), appearing in the filmed part of the piece, was walking in the opposite direction from the crèche, depicted on the map with a flashing light. It all went too fast.


That 'anomaly' interests us, but maybe SY are hoping that the average viewer will gloss over it.

[AnneGuedes]

Speed, yes, seemed to be part of the operation.
2 or 3 images of the man's face (not like the e-fit), devastated, with the little head against his neck, that's all I recall.
The answer is there : a tsunami of calls and e-mails flowing at the speed of a galloping horse!
They'll examine them carefully one by one, waiting for the HO to say "now stop it, money box's empty".

[sadie]

Have you revised your theory in light of the fact that Jane Tanner saw an innocent man  ?

You have not been reading my posts properly Icabod.  Suggest you do that before making facetious comments.

[kmc]

What I found odd about the man who supposedly came forward is;  are we really supposed to believe that he managed to  remember the detail of his now 8/9 year old daughter's pyjamas and then miraculously pulled them out of an old drawer 6.5 years later for the PJ to photograph?  Also, if this father has such detailed memory of his and his daughter’s clothing on that particular night – then surely he should 100% have recognised himself and his daughter from the media at the time, so why didn’t he come forward?  That aside, surely every male tourist would have packed at least one pair of cream/beige trousers and a darker jumper/jacket for such a holiday- it not as though his outfit was astonishing in how closely it matched - they are pretty standard items…... I felt it was more like `'hey it could have been me and I am sure I could have worn a similar outfit one of the evenings`'.  Additionally, although the man's face was obscured his hair just looked plain peculiar - like he was either in a wig or had a load of gel in it.  Everything just felt contrived and too easy - I just dont buy it.