Author Topic: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007  (Read 23133 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #30 on: January 18, 2017, 06:02:19 PM »
How does that follow?
He was there listening, interpreting and taking an interest in the case.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #31 on: January 18, 2017, 06:11:28 PM »
That was while Mr Smith was still convinced he'd seen Gerry.

After he'd realised his (honest) mistake, he changed his mind, also, about producing the efit.

As did his wife, Mary.
The statement we are discussing doesn't seem to be a point in time but like the complete picture over an extended period
"At this time, images of Robert Murat – considered to be the main suspect – begin to be circulated all over the world. After they return to Ireland, the Smiths continue to follow the case. They learn that, according to Jane Tanner’s statements, Murat is definitely the man encountered on the night of the abduction."

I don't know which encounter Amaral is talking about.  Is it the 9:15 PM encounter with Tannerman or just Jane's encounter with the nosey Robert Murat who possibly turns up after the event like hundreds of others did?
« Last Edit: January 18, 2017, 06:26:11 PM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #32 on: January 18, 2017, 06:16:01 PM »
Why would the Smiths suspect the man they allegedly saw was the same man JT saw? No description of the clothing Tannerman was wearing was released to the public until the 24/5/07.
How do we know what encounter Amaral is talking about?   "I don't know which encounter Amaral is talking about.  Is it Jane's 9:15 PM encounter with Tannerman or just the encounter with the nosey Robert Murat who possibly turns up after the event like hundreds of others did?"
« Last Edit: January 18, 2017, 06:25:24 PM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Benice

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #33 on: January 18, 2017, 06:26:50 PM »
The statement we are discussing doesn't seem to be a point in time but like the complete picture over an extended period
"At this time, images of Robert Murat – considered to be the main suspect – begin to be circulated all over the world. After they return to Ireland, the Smiths continue to follow the case. They learn that, according to Jane Tanner’s statements, Murat is definitely the man encountered on the night of the abduction."

I don't know which encounter Amaral is talking about.  Is it the 9:25 encounter with Tannerman or just the encounter with the nosey Robert Murat who possibly turns up after the event like hundreds of others did.

Jane Tanner has never identified RM as the man she saw on the 3rd May.  She did not even know he was a suspect until she saw him on the TV after he had been made an arguido.

If (during the ID parade)  she had identified RM as the man she had seen on the 3rd - the PJ  would definitely have taken a statement from her to that effect.     However, as she was unable to identify anyone as the man she had seen -  they didn't take a statement of any kind  from her - but sent her home instead.

The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #34 on: January 18, 2017, 06:33:44 PM »
Jane Tanner has never identified RM as the man she saw on the 3rd May.  She did not even know he was a suspect until she saw him on the TV after he had been made an arguido.

If (during the ID parade)  she had identified RM as the man she had seen on the 3rd - the PJ  would definitely have taken a statement from her to that effect.     However, as she was unable to identify anyone as the man she had seen -  they didn't take a statement of any kind  from her - but sent her home instead.
Are you sure of your facts about this?  Where is this covered now in the file or elsewhere?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #35 on: January 18, 2017, 06:37:36 PM »
Jane Tanner has never identified RM as the man she saw on the 3rd May.  She did not even know he was a suspect until she saw him on the TV after he had been made an arguido.

If (during the ID parade)  she had identified RM as the man she had seen on the 3rd - the PJ  would definitely have taken a statement from her to that effect.     However, as she was unable to identify anyone as the man she had seen -  they didn't take a statement of any kind  from her - but sent her home instead.

Of course, what JT did say is that, en route to the van from which she would attempt the sighting, they met none other than - you guessed it - Robert Murat and chatted to him.

The 'identification' attempt was surely null and void from that point, but went ahead anyway, and guess what?

At just the moment Jane was to make the attempted identification from the van, another vehicle pulled out and blocked her view.

Farce upon farce, compounded by Murat's lawyer, who made empty noises about Murat suing Jane Tanner.

To be clear, even if Jane had identified Robert Murat (she did not!) Murat would have had no grounds to sue JT unless he could show that Jane Tanner had acted maliciously.

Similarly, no one had a right to sue Yvonne Martin, and rightly so.

It is a cardinal principle of statements given to the police that if they are given in good faith, the person who gives them is protected.

The job of the police, in any country, would be impossible otherwise.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #36 on: January 18, 2017, 06:48:02 PM »
Jane Tanner has never identified RM as the man she saw on the 3rd May.  She did not even know he was a suspect until she saw him on the TV after he had been made an arguido.

If (during the ID parade)  she had identified RM as the man she had seen on the 3rd - the PJ  would definitely have taken a statement from her to that effect.     However, as she was unable to identify anyone as the man she had seen -  they didn't take a statement of any kind  from her - but sent her home instead.

Dont you think Tanner would have had a good idea that Murat was a suspect after the van incident?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #37 on: January 18, 2017, 06:54:58 PM »
Are you sure of your facts about this?  Where is this covered now in the file or elsewhere?

I found this reference to Murat in Jane Tanner's rogatory statement.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

"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”.
 
4078    “And what colours?”
Reply    “Dark colours, but again it was, I think it was quite dark, so dark, sort of darkish jacket but then a more, a lighter trouser but a horrible colour, again this is, sort of a yellowy dark browny, horrible, but not, not a nice colour trousers, but then I wonder whether that was the lights making them look, making them look more of a sort of a mustard, it wasn’t mustard because that’s too bright, but it was just like a, as I say they weren’t nice, they weren’t the sort of clothes I’d expect somebody on a MARK WARNER holiday to, they was, I can’t think of the material, I tried to describe this before, but sort of a cottony material but baggy”.
 
4078    “You know the artist’s impression that you”.
Reply    “Umm”.
 
4078    “That has been circulated a lot.  How happy are you with that?”
Reply    “Erm, phew, reasonably, but, I mean, it was the best I could do after that time, I mean, it was more, the hair was the one thing on that that I wasn’t completely happy about but we couldn’t get it any better because it was the sort of, I almost think that might have been slightly too long or just, but on the whole I think the actual sort of style and everything was, was fairly right.  I mean, I tried to do that though from my original description that we wrote down, sort of well afterwards (inaudible) we tried to get all our thoughts down and I tried to do it as much as I could from that, because six months on, as I say, there was, I think the problem is there’d been so much put into my head since then, like doing the surveillance and, you know, looking at people on that and things, it was very hard to, to do it”."

So what did that say?  " 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, ..."
I suppose in poor translation you could isolate this as Janes' statement "and I’m guessing now it’s MURAT".
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #38 on: January 18, 2017, 07:04:35 PM »
What I am noticing is that Jane is having quite a detailed discussion with the PJ without the apparent need of an interpreter while she is doing the first drawings.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #39 on: January 18, 2017, 07:06:51 PM »
He was there listening, interpreting and taking an interest in the case.

You would need to prove he [Sr Murat] was there post JT interview with the means and opportunity to access her statement and /or interrogate the PJ officer present and/or the interpreter.
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #40 on: January 18, 2017, 07:11:50 PM »
You would need to prove he [Sr Murat] was there post JT interview with the means and opportunity to access her statement and /or interrogate the PJ officer present and/or the interpreter.
There is the interview with Lori Campbell that explains it all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BI0ud541smo
or in English
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jExBfGR7Fio

For 13 days after Madeleine's disappearance RM is made an arguido.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2017, 07:17:26 PM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #41 on: January 18, 2017, 07:16:28 PM »
Quote
So Russell, we walked, so I arranged to meet Bob SMALL in a car park at half seven or something at night or whatever it was, so Russell and I walked up to, erm, to meet Bob SMALL and, by chance, erm, we walked up, we’d missed the throng of Press that were at the top of the road, we actually walked up by Robert MURAT’s house and he came down in his car, in his van at that point, stopped, and he knew Russ, he’d met Russell earlier in the week, so he actually jumped out to say ‘Hi’ to Russell and he was showing us, erm, things in the back of his car as to what he was doing with the, erm, because they’d set up a stop where people could come and give their own evidence”.
 
4078    “Yeah, I can remember that”.
Reply    “So he’d actually jumped out and I’d never, I’d never, I hadn’t met him at this point, so I didn’t really know who he was and I wasn’t really taking it in because I was worried sick I was about to be abducted by the people”.
 
4078    “By the Spanish Police?”
Reply    “And taken to the Spanish Police, so I was a bit sort of like, you know.  Erm, and so we stopped to talk, that was probably a couple of minutes, and he was trying to show us all this stuff, but I was, at that point, I was thinking ‘Oh shut-up I need to go and meet Bob SMALL’”.
 
4078    “Do you remember his car?”
Reply    “It was the green, it was the green, I think it’s a green PASSAT, he was in a green, it’s the one that had been used for the, erm, post, the what’s it, you know, the anonymous information post where people could, because that’s what he was showing us, he was actually showing.  And I remember thinking at the time ‘He’s very keen to show us’, you know, ‘show us what he was doing’, but, you know, we thought ‘Oh great’, but.  So we then carried on and I met Bob SMALL and Russell wrote down the number plate of the car just in case I was taken away.  And, erm, then Bob drove me up to where, erm, the rest of the team were to do the surveillance.  Erm, so I went off in the back of this like refrigerated, well it was pretending to be a refrigerated, erm, van and took it round to the point on the road and obviously, in hindsight now, I realise they were probably calling Robert MURAT to try and get him to walk across, across the top of the road so that, you know, I could see.  But it was a bit odd because there was a car, where we were parked there was a car that moved just at that point that he appeared and then two other people walked by, so I didn’t really, but I didn’t even recognise it as the person I’d been talking to five minutes before, well, you know, half an hour before, so.  Erm, and then, erm, then went, I think because it has gone a bit wrong because this car had been there and then tried to set it up elsewhere, but again I couldn’t really see, I couldn’t really see that well and, you know, it didn’t look, it didn’t jog, jog any memories”.

So who still thinks Jane identified Robert Murat?

Offline misty

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #42 on: January 18, 2017, 07:17:19 PM »
How does that follow?

RM was an arguido so he was entitled to know exactly what evidence the PJ had against him. Maybe the questioning officer waved a piece of paper in front of his & his lawyer's faces...you know how it goes....

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #43 on: January 18, 2017, 07:23:31 PM »
So who still thinks Jane identified Robert Murat?
Hang on, let's see what Jane says:
" “I don’t think so.  I mean, I don’t, phew, I don’t, I don’t think it, no, there doesn’t, there’s no, but then the person I see in the paper doesn’t really look like my recollection of the person I met on the way to meet Bob SMALL.  It’s really annoying because normally I would have probably taken more notice but I was so worried about what I was going to do, because I didn’t know at this point at all, I didn’t really take any notice, but I think it was too short and I remember it being, being long into the neck and not so.  Again, I don’t really, when I saw Robert MURAT outside his house he looked quite little to me, but then when you see him on the telly he seems quite bit, so I can’t, again, I don’t think the build, the build was right, I don’t”."

I think that was a no.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2017, 07:31:21 PM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Jane Tanner's statements re: Murat made public in 2007
« Reply #44 on: January 18, 2017, 08:53:49 PM »
RM was an arguido so he was entitled to know exactly what evidence the PJ had against him. Maybe the questioning officer waved a piece of paper in front of his & his lawyer's faces...you know how it goes....

Oh yeah! right Nobby. So it is to do with RM being arguido rather than an interpreter ? So Robbity is confused and has it all round his neck ?
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey