Innocentman came forward in 2007!

[Wonderfulspam]

Bungling police had 'prime suspect' details for 6 years without realising.

The innocent dad came forward in 2007 but mistakenly remained the focus of the hunt
until this year when SY detectives tracked him down.

http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-bungling-police-prime-2965027

[jassi]

On reading this article, I cannot see a named source for this 'startling' information.  Is there one or is it just another fantasy to sell a few more papers ?

[AnneGuedes]

The funny part is
Leicestershire Police yesterday refused to comment on the latest revelations.
A spokeswoman said: “The disappearance of Madeleine McCann is being investigated by the Metropolitan Police and it would be inappropriate for us to comment.”
A Scotland Yard spokesman said: “We are not giving a running commentary.”
A spokesman for the McCann’s last night declined to comment saying it is “a matter for Operation Grange.

The LC sent questionnaires to possible UK witnesses, to be answered writing. Those that were requested by the PJ were systematically sent to Portugal. Innocentman's one isn't in the files. It makes sense SY discovered it in the LC files (not released to the public as long as the investigation is on).
What is surprising is that it took so long.
Why were the Gaspar files, for instance, sent to Portugal after 6 months ? It seems the LC had to let the PJ know because they were related somehow to a questionnaire to Mr and Mrs Payne that the PJ had requested (they had been interviewed only once in Portimao). The questionnaire was analysed by the LC before being sent to the PJ.


 

[AnneGuedes]

On reading this article, I cannot see a named source for this 'startling' information.  Is there one or is it just another fantasy to sell a few more papers ?

Making the first move to gain a position of force ?

[Sherlock Holmes]

On reading this article, I cannot see a named source for this 'startling' information.  Is there one or is it just another fantasy to sell a few more papers ?

No, there doesn't seem to be a source.

I always suspected that innocentman came forward much earlier. Doesn't make much sense that one of the most sought after suspects in the world would have waited seven years to come forward if he was completely innocent and could prove it.

The pics of him - AND the rotten pyjamas,  my dear Anne - were taken in 2007 (IF the story is correct).

[Sherlock Holmes]

The funny part is
Leicestershire Police yesterday refused to comment on the latest revelations.
A spokeswoman said: “The disappearance of Madeleine McCann is being investigated by the Metropolitan Police and it would be inappropriate for us to comment.”
A Scotland Yard spokesman said: “We are not giving a running commentary.”
A spokesman for the McCann’s last night declined to comment saying it is “a matter for Operation Grange.

The LC sent questionnaires to possible UK witnesses, to be answered writing. Those that were requested by the PJ were systematically sent to Portugal. Innocentman's one isn't in the files. It makes sense SY discovered it in the LC files (not released to the public as long as the investigation is on).
What is surprising is that it took so long.
Why were the Gaspar files, for instance, sent to Portugal after 6 months ? It seems the LC had to let the PJ know because they were related somehow to a questionnaire to Mr and Mrs Payne that the PJ had requested (they had been interviewed only once in Portimao). The questionnaire was analysed by the LC before being sent to the PJ.

Very interesting. Thanks for the clarification on procedure.

[Lyall]

No, there doesn't seem to be a source.

I always suspected that innocentman came forward much earlier. Doesn't make much sense that one of the most sought after suspects in the world would have waited seven years to come forward if he was completely innocent and could prove it.

The pics of him - AND the rotten pyjamas,  my dear Anne - were taken in 2007 (IF the story is correct).

>@@(*&) The article doesn't actually say that, though it is clearly trying to suggest it.

But the paper doesn't provide any evidence there was any contact between the man and the police in 2007 other than by post.

[Redblossom]

No, there doesn't seem to be a source.

I always suspected that innocentman came forward much earlier. Doesn't make much sense that one of the most sought after suspects in the world would have waited seven years to come forward if he was completely innocent and could prove it.

The pics of him - AND the rotten pyjamas,  my dear Anne - were taken in 2007 (IF the story is correct).

According to Crimewatch 2013 the picture of him was taken by the Met Police (presumably the pyjamas too) so could not have been in 2007 as they had no involvement until 2011

Eta

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2653.0

First video at 22 20

[AnneGuedes]

>@@(*&) The article doesn't actually say that, though it is clearly trying to suggest it.

But the paper doesn't provide any evidence there was any contact between the man and the police in 2007 other than by post.

That's how I read it too. If you were right, my dear SH, that would be far worse. That would mean that Mr Innocent was investigated up to the point of being photographed in Tannerman position and of having photographed his daughter's pyjama , position and pyjama fitting amazingly according to DCI RW, to finally strangely say "sorry you're not the one".

[Sherlock Holmes]

That's how I read it too. If you were right, my dear SH, that would be far worse. That would mean that Mr Innocent was investigated up to the point of being photographed in Tannerman position and of having photographed his daughter's pyjama , position and pyjama fitting amazingly according to DCI RW, to finally strangely say "sorry you're not the one".

My mistake, Anne. The article says that the man  'came forward' (whatever that means precisely in terms of police procedure) in 2007, but that he presented the pyjamas to Scotland Yard as proof of his innocence.

Thanks also to Red for that video reference.

[Redblossom]

Why cant anythng ever in this case be clear, only confusing.....


Innocentman looks nothng like Tannerman in the sketch...short wavy dull hair opposed to longer chin length glossy black hair with straighteners used on it!
but I suppose sketches can be embellished!

Innocentman going in wrong direction

Fact remains SY have demolished this sighting as the probable abductor...and must have good reason to do so! And put the focus back as the probable abductor or person of interest squarely on Smithman?whch the the Mccanns have never really promoted, indeed, they are said it would be too expensive to do so, see Tmes article ref suppressed efits for 5 years thread here

is Innocentman Smithman? NO....he would have told police his movements that night, and also his childs pyjamas were nothing like the Smiths description


To answer the OP, yes the Mccanns passed off both sightings as the same man

Oh eta

If all that wasnt confused enough, Jane Tanner is alledged to have said creepy Cooperman mexican moustache man bore an 80 per cent resemblance to the man she saw...how could all three be the same person???
Not to mention the papers touted Hewlett as being the man in these sketches too...and wait for it...the Mail even went as far as suggesting Michaela, Murats now wife as being Tannerman! You couldnt make it up
 

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

According to this and other newspaper reports, the British tourist believed to have identified himself as the 'suspect'  seen by Jane Tanner seemingly presented himself to police in 2007.

It is not clear from this report or the others I have read exactly to whom he presented himself, though one would assume that, being British, he would have approached a British force.

The fact that he seems to have come forward long ago does not answer the question of why he does not appear to have responded to the considerable media focus on 'Tannerman' of the past seven years.

Nonetheless, it does perhaps add some weight to Scotland Yard's assertion that he merits being ruled out of the investigation - whilst raising many further questions with regard to why his initial reporting to police appears to have been overlooked.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/editors-picks/madeleine-mccann-bungling-police-prime-2965027

[AnneGuedes]

The LC was in charge to send questionnaires to the British OC guests who left on the 5th of May before any possible interview by the PJ. Innocentman received one and answered it. It was shelved : for some reason he wasn't considered like a possible Tannerman, he had really a child. The questionnaire wasn't even sent to the PJ. It is part of the LC Files that we'll never have access to, at least before the case is solved.

[Sherlock Holmes]

The LC was in charge to send questionnaires to the British OC guests who left on the 5th of May before any possible interview by the PJ. Innocentman received one and answered it. It was shelved : for some reason he wasn't considered like a possible Tannerman, he had really a child. The questionnaire wasn't even sent to the PJ. It is part of the LC Files that we'll never have access to, at least before the case is solved.

This is all very interesting, Anne.

Can you tell me exactly where in the files this information appears?

So just to confirm, you are saying that it is not a case of the paperwork somehow being overlooked, but rather that LC considered Tannerman's information and concluded that he had nothing to offer police?

[icabodcrane]

I'm assuming this man was a  British holiday-maker  ?    ( do we know that much at least  ? )

If he was,  then he would have made his identity  (  and connection to the McCann case  )   known to British  police as a first port of call   ...  wouldn't he  ?