The tapas group and the 'reconstitution' that was never to take place.

[ShiningInLuz]

Were the waiters and cook wearing watches then?  I seem to remember that their times were all over the place too!  Why do you not trust the Met?  Do you believe they are incompetent?

I thought Gerry stated that he looked at his watch, it was 10:03, so he told Kate it was time to go and check i.e. Gerry had a watch.

I have been comparing the phone times of the July 14 arguidos against the Tapas 9 checks.  The bulk of those checking make it event driven rather than clock driven - a check before ordering, a check after eating starters and before mains, a check after mains. As it happens, the arguido phone times are a poor fit for the check times that are in the statements.

Moving on to the Met and whether they are competent or not.  The actions to date do not generate confidence.  1) They have Tannerman going the wrong way re both crèche and destination.  2) The June 2014 dig in Luz was comical.  3) They claim the arguidos and witnesses of the July/Dec 2014 rounds were targeted, when the list shows they were anything but. 4) They have not visited the actual crime scene or the Smithman scene, making them as much armchair detectives as I am.  They have no idea as to traffic flows within Luz.  They have no idea how to get their hands on Smithman help in the event that Smithman is an innocent Portuguese male.

5) Heriberto has just had a request to access the Luz area phone data turned (by Portuguese authorities, not SY).  SY is sitting on the key piece of information required to progress the case.  I simply do not have the confidence that they know how to interpret it, given point 4.

[pathfinder73]

As far as I know none of the members of the Tapas group had watches or mobile phones, so no way to tell the time. Therefore all the checking times they gave in their statements and timelines were guesses, not facts. Entering guesstimates of a timeline into a computer system gives you a guesstimate of a timeline, so how does that move anything forward?

The Oldfields wore watches and we know Gerry did. Matt gave a time for Kate leaving the table 9:50 - much earlier than 10.

1578 'And did you wear watches''
 Reply 'Yes'.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

By the way, he clarifies that that news had been communicated to all the friends who were in the Tapas by KM subsequent to her having personally been to her flat to check that her children were well.

The question asked, he relates that she had gone there alone to do that at 21:50.

Noticing the disappearance KM returned in panic to the restaurant where the deponent was in order to tell her husband, GM.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-10MAY.htm

[Alfred R Jones]

I thought Gerry stated that he looked at his watch, it was 10:03, so he told Kate it was time to go and check i.e. Gerry had a watch.

I have been comparing the phone times of the July 14 arguidos against the Tapas 9 checks.  The bulk of those checking make it event driven rather than clock driven - a check before ordering, a check after eating starters and before mains, a check after mains. As it happens, the arguido phone times are a poor fit for the check times that are in the statements.

Moving on to the Met and whether they are competent or not.  The actions to date do not generate confidence.  1) They have Tannerman going the wrong way re both crèche and destination.  2) The June 2014 dig in Luz was comical.  3) They claim the arguidos and witnesses of the July/Dec 2014 rounds were targeted, when the list shows they were anything but. 4) They have not visited the actual crime scene or the Smithman scene, making them as much armchair detectives as I am.  They have no idea as to traffic flows within Luz.  They have no idea how to get their hands on Smithman help in the event that Smithman is an innocent Portuguese male.

5) Heriberto has just had a request to access the Luz area phone data turned (by Portuguese authorities, not SY).  SY is sitting on the key piece of information required to progress the case.  I simply do not have the confidence that they know how to interpret it, given point 4.

So you put yourself above the Met as far as this investigation is concerned.  Who are you anyway and how do you know so much about what Operation Grange have and have not done?   As you seem to know way more than the professionals then why haven't you solved this case?

[Brietta]

Everything you say arises from your unshakable conviction that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger. I would be interested to know on what that conviction is based. The reconstitution could have supported that theory, which would have been helpful to all, so why refuse just because it might be uncomfortable? Surely people dedicated to finding Madeleine should have done whatever they could to convince everyone that their theory was possible?

I'm terribly sorry ... I fail to see the point you are making in response to my post which mentions neither abductor nor what my opinion of such may be.

Perhaps I did not make it clear despite putting the relevant fact in bold that Dr McCann had already answered the forty eight questions which cause you and other sceptics such angst.

This was to illustrate the causes of the total breakdown of trust between a group of innocent people who were of the opinion their innocent friends and perhaps by association themselves, were being set up by the Portuguese police.

They had watched their friends walk into a police station without a blemish on their character and walk out as suspects in their daughter's disappearance.
Perhaps they had weighed up the odds of them taking part in a reconstitution with the same end result.

Doesn't answer Jez Wilkin's decision not to participate ... but his reason for not doing so must have been a valid one.

[stephen25000]

I'm terribly sorry ... I fail to see the point you are making in response to my post which mentions neither abductor nor what my opinion of such may be.

Perhaps I did not make it clear despite putting the relevant fact in bold that Dr McCann had already answered the forty eight questions which cause you and other sceptics such angst.

This was to illustrate the causes of the total breakdown of trust between a group of innocent people who were of the opinion their innocent friends and perhaps by association themselves, were being set up by the Portuguese police.

They had watched their friends walk into a police station without a blemish on their character and walk out as suspects in their daughter's disappearance.
Perhaps they had weighed up the odds of them taking part in a reconstitution with the same end result.

Doesn't answer Jez Wilkin's decision not to participate ... but his reason for not doing so must have been a valid one.

The basic reason for the other mccanns not answering the questions was to avoid the possibility of inconsistent accounts.

As to who is innocent or guilty in this case, that has not been established, as charges have yet to be brought.

[Brietta]

The basic reason for the other mccanns not answering the questions was to avoid the possibility of inconsistent accounts.

As to who is innocent or guilty in this case, that has not been established, as charges have yet to be brought.

What an odd response.  All the individual members of the tapas group had already made statements ... how on earth could anything be made of "inconsistent accounts"?

You still haven't detailed how a reconstitution involving only this party could assist in the search for Madeleine, possibly because there is no stretch of the imagination which would enable it.

[stephen25000]

What an odd response.  All the individual members of the tapas group had already made statements ... how on earth could anything be made of "inconsistent accounts"?

You still haven't detailed how a reconstitution involving only this party could assist in the search for Madeleine, possibly because there is no stretch of the imagination which would enable it.

It has been explained numerous times why a reconstruction was useful.

The other members of the group have not cooperated in agreeing to one.

They have given pathetic excuses.

[xtina]

You still haven't detailed how a reconstitution involving only this party could assist in the search for Madeleine, possibly because there is no stretch of the imagination which would enable it.



wouldn't it have shown it was physically impossible to have made the checks ...that they said they did

like the time line ....how odd when all that is going on ...you can recollect times and by whom ....you would have thought only the last two checks would have been surfice.........unless there was an hidden agenda...like IMO ....busy recollecting times ...[no watches ]....instead of searching for maddie ....who could have been found at anytime......but they knew they were going to need that time line .....

[jassi]

It has been explained numerous times why a reconstruction was useful.

The other members of the group have not cooperated in agreeing to one.

They have given pathetic excuses.

It must be useful to have friends you can rely on.

[stephen25000]

It must be useful to have friends you can rely on.

As the mccanns know well.

[G-Unit]

I thought Gerry stated that he looked at his watch, it was 10:03, so he told Kate it was time to go and check i.e. Gerry had a watch.

I have been comparing the phone times of the July 14 arguidos against the Tapas 9 checks.  The bulk of those checking make it event driven rather than clock driven - a check before ordering, a check after eating starters and before mains, a check after mains. As it happens, the arguido phone times are a poor fit for the check times that are in the statements.

Moving on to the Met and whether they are competent or not.  The actions to date do not generate confidence.  1) They have Tannerman going the wrong way re both crèche and destination.  2) The June 2014 dig in Luz was comical.  3) They claim the arguidos and witnesses of the July/Dec 2014 rounds were targeted, when the list shows they were anything but. 4) They have not visited the actual crime scene or the Smithman scene, making them as much armchair detectives as I am.  They have no idea as to traffic flows within Luz.  They have no idea how to get their hands on Smithman help in the event that Smithman is an innocent Portuguese male.

5) Heriberto has just had a request to access the Luz area phone data turned (by Portuguese authorities, not SY).  SY is sitting on the key piece of information required to progress the case.  I simply do not have the confidence that they know how to interpret it, given point 4.

There is some doubt about watches; Gerald's 10th May statement has this note;

important note: The following text inserted in brackets into Gerry McCanns statement [with no way to tell the time], has now been removed to eliminate any confusion. The bracketed text is the translators note, and not part of the original statement.   
Text before removal: Half and hour later, without anything to signal [with no way to tell the time], it being 22h03

Text now reads: Half and hour later without anything to signal, it being 22h03
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

I agree about SY, they have yet to show they are doing anything sensible, the crechman story was ridiculous.

[G-Unit]

Were the waiters and cook wearing watches then?  I seem to remember that their times were all over the place too!  Why do you not trust the Met?  Do you believe they are incompetent?

No idea what the waiters and cooks had, it's not mentioned. You said the Met had HOLMES. I pointed out that, like any computer system, it's only as good as the info. you put into it. Inexact times are inexact times. The story about crecheman was unbelievable. The reason could be that they're incompetent or it could be that they just needed to get rid of him at any cost.

[xtina]

No idea what the waiters and cooks had, it's not mentioned. You said the Met had HOLMES. I pointed out that, like any computer system, it's only as good as the info. you put into it. Inexact times are inexact times. The story about crecheman was unbelievable. The reason could be that they're incompetent or it could be that they just needed to get rid of him at any cost.

good point ...because how many years did it take for him to come forward .....where had he been ....to miss one of the most publicised stories of modern times....how come it took him so long to come forward...an you have never heard another thing of him since.

[Alfred R Jones]

No idea what the waiters and cooks had, it's not mentioned. You said the Met had HOLMES. I pointed out that, like any computer system, it's only as good as the info. you put into it. Inexact times are inexact times. The story about crecheman was unbelievable. The reason could be that they're incompetent or it could be that they just needed to get rid of him at any cost.

Inexact times are inexact times whether you use a computer system or a physical reconstitution.  The advantage of the former over the latter I would imagine is that you can run through numerous permutations without getting the protagonists to act out dozens of different scenarios.

AS for your comment that the Met needed to get rid of Tannerman at any cost - well why would they need to do that publicly? How would it help them to do this?

[G-Unit]

Inexact times are inexact times whether you use a computer system or a physical reconstitution.  The advantage of the former over the latter I would imagine is that you can run through numerous permutations without getting the protagonists to act out dozens of different scenarios.

AS for your comment that the Met needed to get rid of Tannerman at any cost - well why would they need to do that publicly? How would it help them to do this?

HOLMES needed to take account of when the meals were ordered, served and eaten because most of the group referred to these events when speaking about the checks. I said perhaps the Met needed to get rid of Tannerman. I assume that's so they could concentrate attention on Smithman. Maybe HOLMES demonstrated beyond doubt that there was no opportunity whatsoever for Tannerman to be the abductor. There could have been a ten minute window between Matthew returning to the table and Jane Tanner leaving it to take over from Russell, however.