australian article by Mark Saunokonoko who supports amaral discussion

[sadie]

Do you have a cite for your assertion about Wilkins saying they chatted for 15 minutes please?

We spoke for a few minutes.

The conversation lasted for about three (3) to five (5) minutes.

The conversation lasted for approximately three to five minutes
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm

 bumped into a person he had played tennis with and who had a child's push chair, he was also British, he had a short conversation with him
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm

both having chatted for 3 to 4 minutes,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS-ROGATORY.htm

Somewhere I have seen 15 minutes from Jez, but I am not wading thru pages of scriopt to find it.

Three to five minutes is plenty enough time for it to have haoppened.   
For someone to have entered the apartment via the front door with a key, walked into the childrens bedroom , opened the window and shutters, picked up Madeleine, walked out closing the front door with the key takes me under 50 seconds and I am nearly 80 and mobility impaired.

Then passing Madeleine from the lifter to Tannerman over the walkway wall .... + him walking with Madeleine the short distance to Tannerman corner takes less than 30 seconds. 

Total time from entering the apartment to Jane Tanner sighting = 1 min 20 seconds.

3 to 5 minutes is plenty enough time for it to have happened.


Measure out the distances and try it yourself

All this is my theory  and included in that theory is the fact that i think it highly likely that the whole procedure was monitored and directed by an accomplice on the middle or upper balcony of block 6 immediately across the raod.  He signalled with a pencil beam torch or flicking a lighter on and off IMO.

From the balcony viewpoint, he could see the area outside the front door and Madeleines window, to signal to any intruder there.  He could also see the patio area and the bottom of the steps up to the patio window, to see family and friends arriving and leaving thru the patio door to check the children.

Additionally he could look straight into the sitting room and see anything going on


This is my mini theory (part of) ... and I am happy for anyone to constructively pull it apart ... if they can.

[G-Unit]

There is no evidence that anyone has ever identified Murat as Tannerman.    If a positive identification existed it would have been recorded in the prosecutor's Final report as a reason (in fact probably the most important reason) why he was made an Arguido.   It wasn't mentioned -  because it doesn't exist.   

AIMHO

Jane did the surveillance on Sunday 13th. On Monday 14th Murat's house was searched and later he was taken to be interviewed. This was seen on Sky by Rachael and she recognised him from 3rd. He was made arguido on 15th, possibly at his own request.

“Erm well I think it’s when I’d done the, well I did the surveillance and then the next day after that, I think it came on Sky News about whether they were searching, what the MURAT’s house, so that’s Rachel sort of came running down at that point
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

and this is on Monday the erm the fourteenth, the day that he was arrested or whatever....and I switched on the TV and he was there you know, being taken off to the Police Station..... that surveillance thing she'd done, erm I think it was on the Sunday
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

[G-Unit]

Somewhere I have seen 15 minutes from Jez, but I am not wading thru pages of scriopt to find it.

Three to five minutes is plenty enough time for it to have haoppened.   
For someone to have entered the apartment via the front door with a key, walked into the childrens bedroom , opened the window and shutters, picked up Madeleine, walked out closing the front door with the key takes me under 50 seconds and I am nearly 80 and mobility impaired.

Then passing Madeleine from the lifter to Tannerman over the walkway wall .... + him walking with Madeleine the short distance to Tannerman corner takes less than 30 seconds. 

Total time from entering the apartment to Jane Tanner sighting = 1 min 20 seconds.

3 to 5 minutes is plenty enough time for it to have happened.


Measure out the distances and try it yourself

All this is my theory  and included in that theory is the fact that i think it highly likely that the whole procedure was monitored and directed by an accomplice on the middle or upper balcony of block 6 immediately across the raod.  He signalled with a pencil beam torch or flicking a lighter on and off IMO.

From the balcony viewpoint, he could see the area outside the front door and Madeleines window, to signal to any intruder there.  He could also see the patio area and the bottom of the steps up to the patio window, to see family and friends arriving and leaving thru the patio door to check the children.

Additionally he could look straight into the sitting room and see anything going on


This is my mini theory (part of) ... and I am happy for anyone to constructively pull it apart ... if they can.

I think that posting details which can't be supported by cites is misleading, whether deliberately or not.

Theories are OK but I think they should be based on evidence.

There is no evidence of entry by using a key.
There is no evidence of anyone being in the apartment.
There is no evidence of anyone except Kate McCann touching the bedroom window.
There is no evidence of a watcher.
I would like evidence that the front door and window of 5A could be seen from the balcony of block 6.
I would like to know what kind of idiots would go ahead and carry a child away while her father was in the vicinity. If he had seen them the game would have been up.

[sadie]

Jane did the surveillance on Sunday 13th. On Monday 14th Murat's house was searched and later he was taken to be interviewed. This was seen on Sky by Rachael and she recognised him from 3rd. He was made arguido on 15th, possibly at his own request.

“Erm well I think it’s when I’d done the, well I did the surveillance and then the next day after that, I think it came on Sky News about whether they were searching, what the MURAT’s house, so that’s Rachel sort of came running down at that point
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

and this is on Monday the erm the fourteenth, the day that he was arrested or whatever....and I switched on the TV and he was there you know, being taken off to the Police Station..... that surveillance thing she'd done, erm I think it was on the Sunday
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

Nothing in those quotes to indicate that Jane had identified Robert Murat when the PJ showed him surreptitiously to her.  There are other quotes that confirm that she did not identify Murat.

Why dont you find those Gunit?

[G-Unit]

Nothing in those quotes to indicate that Jane had identified Robert Murat when Amaral showed him surreptitiously to her.  There are other quotes that confirm that she did not identify Murat.

Why dont you find those Gunit?

I was demonstrating the timeline of events, Sadie, not what was said during them. Was Amaral present at the surveillance? Cite?

[Benice]

Jane did the surveillance on Sunday 13th. On Monday 14th Murat's house was searched and later he was taken to be interviewed. This was seen on Sky by Rachael and she recognised him from 3rd. He was made arguido on 15th, possibly at his own request.

“Erm well I think it’s when I’d done the, well I did the surveillance and then the next day after that, I think it came on Sky News about whether they were searching, what the MURAT’s house, so that’s Rachel sort of came running down at that point
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

and this is on Monday the erm the fourteenth, the day that he was arrested or whatever....and I switched on the TV and he was there you know, being taken off to the Police Station..... that surveillance thing she'd done, erm I think it was on the Sunday
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RACHAEL-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

I'm not sure what your point is G.

The first time JT (and the others ) say anything to the police about Murat is AFTER they saw him on TV - when he was an Arguido.   At no time did she or anyone else say they recognised him as Tannerman by the way he walked - or even mention him before he was made an arguido -  or before his face was shown on TV. 

IMO

 

 

[sadie]

I was demonstrating the timeline of events, Sadie, not what was said during them. Was Amaral present at the surveillance? Cite?

Well can you put it right please.  TY

I have amended my post to say PJ because I am not sure Amaral was there./  He was noticeable by his absence from the scene of the crime, come to think of it !

ETA:  Altho as Head Honcho he would have directed that  Jane be shown Murat.  He was pulling the strings, wasn't he ?

[sadie]

I'm not sure what your point is G.

The first time JT (and the others ) say anything to the police about Murat is AFTER they saw him on TV - when he was an Arguido.   At no time did she or anyone else say they recognised him as Tannerman by the way he walked - or even mention him before he was made an arguido -  or before his face was shown on TV. 

IMO

 

I noticed exactly the same thing Benice.

At no time did Jane or anyone say that they recognised Tannerman by the way he walked.

Where are you getting all this incorrect stuff from, Gunit?

[ShiningInLuz]

I think that posting details which can't be supported by cites is misleading, whether deliberately or not.

Theories are OK but I think they should be based on evidence.

There is no evidence of entry by using a key.
There is no evidence of anyone being in the apartment.
There is no evidence of anyone except Kate McCann touching the bedroom window.
There is no evidence of a watcher.
I would like evidence that the front door and window of 5A could be seen from the balcony of block 6.
I would like to know what kind of idiots would go ahead and carry a child away while her father was in the vicinity. If he had seen them the game would have been up.

See bold.  There is a 'safe' escape route a few metres on from that point.  By 'safe', I mean it is hidden re block 5.  And if pursued, the simple act of dumping the child gives safety i.e. the father stops to look after the child, leaving the perpetrator free to flee.

I tried it one 3rd of May to see if it made Tannerman fit with Smithman, but that failed.   

[G-Unit]

I'm not sure what your point is G.

The first time JT (and the others ) say anything to the police about Murat is AFTER they saw him on TV - when he was an Arguido.   At no time did she or anyone else say they recognised him as Tannerman by the way he walked - or even mention him before he was made an arguido -  or before his face was shown on TV. 

IMO

I was just pointing out that the surveillance happened two days before Murat became arguido.

I think it's strange that there's no mention of Jane Tanner's surveillance in the PJ files. There are many reports of 'external diligences' in the files so why not this one? We have no information about the officers involved and no statements from them.

Jane says she was telephoned by Bob Small saying he wanted to pick her up but she mustn't tell anyone. She thinks she checked with Stewart before agreeing. I assume that's Stewart Prior. Was he in Portugal or the UK I wonder? Anyway, she agrees to meet Small 'in a car park' at 7.30 pm. She and Russell walked past the press pack 'at the top of the road' towards Murat's house. He stopped his car to speak to them, then they went to meet Small who ferried Jane to the 'team'. They drove her in a 'pretend' refrigerated van to the spot where she had seen the man and child on 3rd.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

Why did Bob Small offer to pick her up and then meet her in a car park?
Why did he not know which Police force he was working with?
Why should it be a secret?
Where were the 'team' waiting with their 'pretend' refrigerated van?
How did whoever get Murat into position? He was last seen near his house, but he must have ended up on foot in front of 5A.
Why did Amaral think Jane was in an unmarked car with tinted windows?



 

 

[G-Unit]

See bold.  There is a 'safe' escape route a few metres on from that point.  By 'safe', I mean it is hidden re block 5.  And if pursued, the simple act of dumping the child gives safety i.e. the father stops to look after the child, leaving the perpetrator free to flee.

I tried it one 3rd of May to see if it made Tannerman fit with Smithman, but that failed.   

You think people might watch the group, make a plan, get the child and then risk losing her by marching past her Dad with her? What a waste of time.

[sadie]

I think that posting details which can't be supported by cites is misleading, whether deliberately or not.

Theories are OK but I think they should be based on evidence.

There is no evidence of entry by using a key.
There is no evidence of anyone being in the apartment.
There is no evidence of anyone except Kate McCann touching the bedroom window.
There is no evidence of a watcher.
I would like evidence that the front door and window of 5A could be seen from the balcony of block 6.
I would like to know what kind of idiots would go ahead and carry a child away while her father was in the vicinity. If he had seen them the game would have been up.

I proved that your assertions about there not being time to take Madeleine were completely wrong



To show how your opinions above appear incorrect:

Evidence of entry by using a key = There would be no evidence if the door was opened using the key, then pulled to again using the key.   Using a key = NO fingerprints ... brilliant!

Evidence of someone being in the apartment = not exactly evidence, but the bedroom door angle was changed and the shtters were up.  Easier to raise the shutters from inside, dont you agree?

NO evidence of anyone except Kate McCann touching the bedroom window.  = The fact that there are no other fingerprints is what is so suspicious.  Someone was very careful not to leave any IMO.

NO evidence of a watcher. = What about the pile of fag ends on the balcony (mentioned by another OC Guest)
Also the man who was observed by three different groups of people watching 5A


I would like evidence that the front door and window of 5A could be seen from the balcony of block 6.
I am not sure I have the correct block name, but the balconies are in the block immediately across the road from the side of 5A.  That is block 6 or maybe block 4.


http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Tappas9/FENNL.jpg


The balcony is a perfect spot to watch the windows of 5A sitting room window, kitchen window, steps up and and patio area.  This photo is taken from the top balcony.
Sitting room window is above the policeman


http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/church/195.jpg

Madeleines window is the larger one behind the wall.
As I have repeated stated the front door is deeply recessed and out of sight ...  as such it doesn’t show on here, but it is to the left of Madeleines window.   

So this gives a view of the balconies similar to that from the front door area and outside the window to Madeleines bedroom.   You will see two balconies at the left of the image


The middle balcony is likely to be the viewing balcony IMO, it looks straight into the sitting room of 5A and has splendid views of both back and front entrances and exit areas as well as the area outside Madeleines window
Dont forget the fag ends.


There is a better photograph but I cant find it atm


I would like to know what kind of idiots would go ahead and carry a child away while her father was in the vicinity. = IMO, the idiot on the balcony saw Gerry leave, start down the steps and immediately signalled the go ahaed To an abductor standing by the front door with a lifter.  The idiot then left via the internal staircase and back garden of the balcony block to a parked pick up vehicle on the little area opposite the Tapas reception.  This is adjoining the gate to the garden of the balcony block.

At the same time the front door was opened using a key and the abduction started.


Tannerman with Madeleine wasn't picked up because the idiot driving the vehicle took fright upon seeing Gerry then seeing Jane witnessing Madeleine being carried away ... and wetting his pants, he drove off in the opposite direction


OK Gunit
I think I have answered everything.  Please do me the honour of at least reading it carefully and giving me a fair and considered answer.



This is not my main theory, just a little one.

AIMHO, but it is only a theory and it stands waiting to see if it can sensibly be shot down

[ShiningInLuz]

You think people might watch the group, make a plan, get the child and then risk losing her by marching past her Dad with her? What a waste of time.

Is there some reason why Tannerman must be planned?  Is there some reason it is 'people', rather than 'person'?

I am telling you where the nearest 'safe' escape route is.  Start.  End.

[sadie]

You think people might watch the group, make a plan, get the child and then risk losing her by marching past her Dad with her? What a waste of time.

Excuse me, but hadn't you noticed there are three directions that Tannerman carrying Madeleine could have taken, had he known Gerry then Jane would be in the.  Some of these directions have branches off them very quickly after leaving the front of 5A.

Go round two corners and you are HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT.    That expressiion is one frequently used by the people I am interested in.

[G-Unit]

I proved that your assertions about there not being time to take Madeleine were completely wrong



To show how your opinions above appear incorrect:

Evidence of entry by using a key = There would be no evidence if the door was opened using the key, then pulled to again using the key.   Using a key = NO fingerprints ... brilliant!

Evidence of someone being in the apartment = not exactly evidence, but the bedroom door angle was changed and the shtters were up.  Easier to raise the shutters from inside, dont you agree?

NO evidence of anyone except Kate McCann touching the bedroom window.  = The fact that there are no other fingerprints is what is so suspicious.  Someone was very careful not to leave any IMO.

NO evidence of a watcher. = What about the pile of fag ends on the balcony (mentioned by another OC Guest)
Also the man who was observed by three different groups of people watching 5A


I would like evidence that the front door and window of 5A could be seen from the balcony of block 6.
I am not sure I have the correct block name, but the balconies are in the block immediately across the road from the side of 5A.  That is block 6 or maybe block 4.


http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Tappas9/FENNL.jpg


The balcony is a perfect spot to watch the windows of 5A sitting room window, kitchen window, steps up and and patio area.  This photo is taken from the top balcony.
Sitting room window is above the policeman


http://gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/church/195.jpg

Madeleines window is the larger one behind the wall.
As I have repeated stated the front door is deeply recessed and out of sight ...  as such it doesn’t show on here, but it is to the left of Madeleines window.   

So this gives a view of the balconies similar to that from the front door area and outside the window to Madeleines bedroom.   You will see two balconies at the left of the image


The middle balcony is likely to be the viewing balcony IMO, it looks straight into the sitting room of 5A and has splendid views of both back and front entrances and exit areas as well as the area outside Madeleines window
Dont forget the fag ends.


There is a better photograph but I cant find it atm


I would like to know what kind of idiots would go ahead and carry a child away while her father was in the vicinity. = IMO, the idiot on the balcony saw Gerry leave, start down the steps and immediately signalled the go ahaed To an abductor standing by the front door with a lifter.  The idiot then left via the internal staircase and back garden of the balcony block to a parked pick up vehicle on the little area opposite the Tapas reception.  This is adjoining the gate to the garden of the balcony block.

At the same time the front door was opened using a key and the abduction started.


Tannerman with Madeleine wasn't picked up because the idiot driving the vehicle took fright upon seeing Gerry then seeing Jane witnessing Madeleine being carried away ... and wetting his pants, he drove off in the opposite direction


OK Gunit
I think I have answered everything.  Please do me the honour of at least reading it carefully and giving me a fair and considered answer.



This is not my main theory, just a little one.

AIMHO, but it is only a theory and it stands waiting to see if it can sensibly be shot down

It's very difficult to disprove a theory which isn't based on evidence.