Another look at Tannerman and those pyjamas.

[Jazzy]

It is!

[AnneGuedes]

How many of us keep PJs for like 6 years belonging to our children?

I love the fact the guy could show the pyjamas after all this time, OR did he show them in 2007/2008 and this was discounted way back then.

Really it just seems an odd thing to place your hands on....

6 years. The child would be about 10 now...I know people have other children but still it does seem very odd to me.

Also i never believed JT could see the frill of PJ. Every night when i am in bed my knees are bent and my stupid PJ bottoms alwasy ride up past my knees lol....

So the bottom of the PJ would not be visible anyway not really, and how come end of April in PDL anyone is walking their children out without a blanket on are you SERIOUS. We are to believe the man is warmly dressed but the child has just a pair of cotton PJ on...

The child didn't a blanket, perhaps.

[Redblossom]

It is a fact that if a person wears pedal-pusher length pj bottoms as per those shown by Kate McCann, if knees are bent it is a law of physics that they will be pulled up the leg.

 qed  : the bottom part of the pj legs will not look as shown in the artist's impression drawn when described by Ms Tanner. They will be substantially higher up the leg, so much so that they might actually disappear at the knee.

Which suggests if right, Tanner did NOT see Madeleines pyjamas, but did see the man with a two year  old with LONG  bottoms on to describe any pattern

[AnneGuedes]

Yes it's very noticeable isnt it.   And if they are not liars they are being 'blackmailed' by the McCanns to support them according to some.     All very odd.

IMO Silvia Batista has obviously got it wrong as we've all seen plenty of proof that it is perfectly possible for JT to have seen someone crossing the road where she said she did.     IIRC No-one else has made that claim. 

Ms Batista is the lady who made a second statement months after the 3rd May claiming to have recalled more about that night in the intervening time.    That seems at odds with some people's claims that JT 'made up' any later details of her sighting - and could not have simply recalled them.

Didn't Ms Batista also think it was strange that Kate asked for a priest - due to the Portuguese culture that you only ask for a priest to attend if someone has died?  I wonder if anyone ever put her right on that.

IIRC correctly this is the lady who also said she saw Robert Murat on the 3rd May and was supposed to be one of the group that attended the 'confrontation meeting' with Murat - but didn't turn up.   

(all from memory so am happy to be corrected if necessary).

Silvia Batista was there, she translated, but you, who weren't there, decide that she "got it wrong" !
When will you stop accusing witnesses, Benice ? You have absolutely no evidence to back you insinuations.
 
Why would you wake up a priest you don't know and who doesn't speak your language in the middle of the night ? You do that when somebody is dying and needs the appropriate ritual.

[AnneGuedes]

Which suggests if right, Tanner did NOT see Madeleines pyjamas, but did see the man with a two year  old with LONG  bottoms on to describe any pattern

Or Madeleine didn't have the exhibited pyjamas (see the Vanity Fair interview). Aoife saw long leaves and I really think they all would have noticed the bare feet if the bottom had been a short one.

[Redblossom]

Or Madeleine didn't have the exhibited pyjamas (see the Vanity Fair interview). Aoife saw long leaves and I really think they all would have noticed the bare feet if the bottom had been a short one.

yes  very good point...and also what annoys me is that tanner said in statements and tv interviews she only saw a pair of feet and bottom of pyjamas....but by may 10 they all penned a joint statement part  of which was this


- The child appeared to be a Caucasian girl about the ages of 3-4.
- She was seen to lie motionless/limp in the man's arms consistent with her sleeping or possibly drugged.
- She did not seem to be wrapped up well for the time of night wearing only pyjamas; the trousers were light coloured with a floral element, possibly with turn-ups. The top was not well seen though there was thought to be another colour involved possibly pink.
- She was not wearing shoes.


Goodnight Anne! hope the police of both countries sort the circus out pdq....oh for anyone reading the cost so far as 5m pound it is now 7.6 and judged to go to 11 in near future

[Benice]

Silvia Batista was there, she translated, but you, who weren't there, decide that she "got it wrong" !
When will you stop accusing witnesses, Benice ? You have absolutely no evidence to back you insinuations.
 
Why would you wake up a priest you don't know and who doesn't speak your language in the middle of the night ? You do that when somebody is dying and needs the appropriate ritual.

Ms Batista was wrong Anne - as we've seen the videos and maps and know that JT would have been able to see a person crossing the road as she stated.   Has anyone else apart from S.Batista  made that same claim?  Did the police officers who JT spoke to that night come to that conclusion that what she said was impossible? 

In this country Priests can be called on in times of great despair or anxiety -  and not just when someone has died.  It's called pastoral care.     No-one would think it was strange as S.Batista did.     The language barrier would have made no difference - a prayer is a prayer in any language.

Stop telling fibs  - I am not 'accusing' anyone of anything or making any insinuations.  I am stating facts.

[AnneGuedes]

Ms Batista was wrong Anne - as we've seen the videos and maps and know that JT would have been able to see a person crossing the road as she stated.   Has anyone else apart from S.Batista  made that same claim?  Did the police officers who JT spoke to that night come to that conclusion that what she said was impossible? 

In this country Priests can be called on in times of great despair or anxiety -  and not just when someone has died.  It's called pastoral care.     No-one would think it was strange as S.Batista did.     The language barrier would have made no difference - a prayer is a prayer in any language.

Stop telling fibs  - I am not 'accusing' anyone of anything or making any insinuations.  I am stating facts.

Unfortunately you're not stating facts, Benice, you're insinuating a witness was wrong ! Once more you're spreading a myth.
How can you be sure that Ms Tanner didn't change her story ? Mr McCann discredited her about the side of the street. And now SY has indirectly proved that she invented the colours of the pyjama.
Mrs Batista is an independent witness, she had absolutely no reason to lie.

Pastoral care exists in Portugal as well, but nobody would call an unknown priest just to pronounce prayers in Latin. If prayers could bring back a missing child, that would be known.

[Benice]

Unfortunately you're not stating facts, Benice, you're insinuating a witness was wrong ! Once more you're spreading a myth.
How can you be sure that Ms Tanner didn't change her story ? Mr McCann discredited her about the side of the street. And now SY has indirectly proved that she invented the colours of the pyjama.
Mrs Batista is an independent witness, she had absolutely no reason to lie.

Pastoral care exists in Portugal as well, but nobody would call an unknown priest just to pronounce prayers in Latin. If prayers could bring back a missing child, that would be known.

Stop fibbing.    I am not and never have spread myths.       S. Batista herself says she didn't know exactly where JT was on the street when she saw the man - so how can she be sure of what JT could or couldn't see?     JT DID know where she was on the street because SHE was there and S. Batista wasn't.

It's quite obvious from S. Batista's comments that she had no knowledge of the pastoral care which exists in the UK - where it is NOT the case that priests only attend when a death has occurred.

Who mentioned Latiin?   Kate would have asked the priest to pray for Madeleine and her safe return.  It would be of no consequence what language the priest prayed in.

Quote from S. Batista's statement

She wanted to mention that around 3h00 Madeleine's parents asked for a priest to be present. They didn't explain why they wanted a priest but she (the witness) was amazed, because there were no indications that the little girl was dead and only in these circumstances is usually asked the presence of a priest.

At some point she translated the statement of one of the ladies who belonged to the group and that she describes as a brunette one. This lady said to the GNR elements, and she (the witness) translated, that she had seen a man on the road who might have carried a child.

This situation surprised her because she (the witness) was convinced that when the lady saw the man, the lady was in a place from where she had no angle of vision for the place where she saw the man. She doesn't know exactly what was the position of the lady when she saw the man, but she knows that the lady said she saw the man in the street in front of the Madeleine's bedroom window, walking in the direction of the street that then leads to the Baptista supermarket.

[Eleanor]

I am not entirely sure that Scotland Yard are right about this.  And they didn't actually state it as a fact.  But the I don't have a problem with this man hanging around back lanes for little more than half an hour.  He could have been waiting for a pick up connection.

[Jazzy]

Silvia Batista was there, she translated, but you, who weren't there, decide that she "got it wrong" !
When will you stop accusing witnesses, Benice ? You have absolutely no evidence to back you insinuations.
 
Why would you wake up a priest you don't know and who doesn't speak your language in the middle of the night ? You do that when somebody is dying and needs the appropriate ritual.

Here's the thing, you who also weren't there, and many others, equally not there, have all decided everything the Mccanns, their friends, and anyone supportive of them have all "got it wrong", and endlessly attempt to prove it.

[AnneGuedes]

Stop fibbing.    I am not and never have spread myths.       S. Batista herself says she didn't know exactly where JT was on the street when she saw the man - so how can she be sure of what JT could or couldn't see?     JT DID know where she was on the street because SHE was there and S. Batista wasn't.

It's quite obvious from S. Batista's comments that she had no knowledge of the pastoral care which exists in the UK - where it is NOT the case that priests only attend when a death has occurred.

Who mentioned Latiin?   Kate would have asked the priest to pray for Madeleine and her safe return.  It would be of no consequence what language the priest prayed in.

Quote from S. Batista's statement

She wanted to mention that around 3h00 Madeleine's parents asked for a priest to be present. They didn't explain why they wanted a priest but she (the witness) was amazed, because there were no indications that the little girl was dead and only in these circumstances is usually asked the presence of a priest.

At some point she translated the statement of one of the ladies who belonged to the group and that she describes as a brunette one. This lady said to the GNR elements, and she (the witness) translated, that she had seen a man on the road who might have carried a child.

This situation surprised her because she (the witness) was convinced that when the lady saw the man, the lady was in a place from where she had no angle of vision for the place where she saw the man. She doesn't know exactly what was the position of the lady when she saw the man, but she knows that the lady said she saw the man in the street in front of the Madeleine's bedroom window, walking in the direction of the street that then leads to the Baptista supermarket.

You are not Ms Tanner and can't know better than Mrs Batista what Ms Tanner said or said not. Affirming that Mrs Batista was wrong and Ms Tanner right is nothing but producing a myth. And repeating it is spreading it.
Ms Tanner has been discredited by Mr McCann and SY. The PJ never believed her story.
Mrs Batista says something important who escaped your attention in your idée fixe to discredit her.
she knows that the lady said she saw the man in the street in front of the Madeleine's bedroom window
This street is not Francisco Gentil Martins.

Since when do people wake up an unknown priest in a foreign language to ask to pray in Latin for a child who would likely be found within hours ?  Hadn't Mrs McCann called already her personal UK priest ? Why wasn't it sufficient ?
Mrs Batista wasn't the only one to find the McCann request was inappropriate.

[Benice]

You are not Ms Tanner and can't know better than Mrs Batista what Ms Tanner said or said not. Affirming that Mrs Batista was wrong and Ms Tanner right is nothing but producing a myth. And repeating it is spreading it.
Ms Tanner has been discredited by Mr McCann and SY. The PJ never believed her story.
Mrs Batista says something important who escaped your attention in your idée fixe to discredit her.
she knows that the lady said she saw the man in the street in front of the Madeleine's bedroom window
This street is not Francisco Gentil Martins.

Since when do people wake up an unknown priest in a foreign language to ask to pray in Latin for a child who would likely be found within hours ?  Hadn't Mrs McCann called already her personal UK priest ? Why wasn't it sufficient ?
Mrs Batista wasn't the only one to find the McCann request was inappropriate.

You are not Jane Tanner either, or S. Batista or Kate McCann and yet you purport to know better than anyone else about them and their actions - but you produce no evidence - and ignore the evidence presented to you.      I know of no-one else who claimed that JT could not have seen a man crossing the road where she said she did. 

Jane Tanner has been vindicated by SY - as it has been proved she did not lie or fantasize about seeing a man who carried a child.    SY were impressed by the accuracy of her description of the man and child she saw, who has now been identified as a tourist.

Amaral  believed  JT's sighting until his case against Murat failed and he turned his attention to the parents - otherwise he would not have arranged for her to attend the Identify parade with RM.  It was only after he decided the parents were complicit and JTs sighting became inconvenient that he decided to deal with that problem by discrediting her as a witness.

Your insistence on ignoring the fact that in this country a priest is NOT called only when a death has occurred, but offers spiritual support on other occasions as part of their Pastoral Care is becoming tedious.   What is there NOT to understand about that.      S. Batista obviously was not aware and so her comment was based on her ignorance of the situation.   You have been made aware and yet apparently refuse to ackowledge it.  Inexplicable.





 

[DCI]

You are not Jane Tanner either, or S. Batista or Kate McCann and yet you purport to know better than anyone else about them and their actions - but you produce no evidence - and ignore the evidence presented to you.      I know of no-one else who claimed that JT could not have seen a man crossing the road where she said she did. 

Jane Tanner has been vindicated by SY - as it has been proved she did not lie or fantasize about seeing a man who carried a child.    SY were impressed by the accuracy of her description of the man and child she saw, who has now been identified as a tourist.

Amaral  believed  JT's sighting until his case against Murat failed and he turned his attention to the parents - otherwise he would not have arranged for her to attend the Identify parade with RM.  It was only after he decided the parents were complicit and JTs sighting became inconvenient that he decided to deal with that problem by discrediting her as a witness.

Your insistence on ignoring the fact that in this country a priest is NOT called only when a death has occurred, but offers spiritual support on other occasions as part of their Pastoral Care is becoming tedious.   What is there NOT to understand about that.      S. Batista obviously was not aware and so her comment was based on her ignorance of the situation.   You have been made aware and yet apparently refuse to ackowledge it.  Inexplicable.

 

Just who is Silvia Batista? Maintenance manager. She's was everywhere working on this case. Just about says it all. Yet her word is taken as gospel. Except her seeing Murat on the 3rd May.

[Rachel Granada]

Just who is Silvia Batista? Maintenance manager. She's was everywhere working on this case. Just about says it all. Yet her word is taken as gospel. Except her seeing Murat on the 3rd May.

I may be mistaken DCI but was there  glimpse of Ms Batista on one of the dog videos?