CMTV Gonçalo Amaral - O Enigma - with English subtitles

[misty]

Jez was adamant Jane didn't pass him and he was adamant where he was. Jez was facing the side gate so Jane had to pass within feet of his eyeline. He saw Jane dressed in purple when he first ventured out at around 20:30. That is the only time the witness saw Jane that night.

Had Jane turned left onto the path as I believe she could have seen both men and a man crossing the top of the road without any being aware of her. Elementary. There were two routes back so of course the other route is a possibility!

Two witnesses did not see her pass them on a quiet deserted street. That is the important fact that cannot be swept under the carpet. Look at the attempted reconstruction fiasco - you were here Gerry - No I was across the road. What an utter shambles! Do a reconstruction and see the reaction.

Patsy is cleared - one more carrier to go.

"He was adamant that he did not see any one else in the area. When spoken to in reference to Jane Tanner walking by, he again stated that he saw no one." http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm

If Jane had turned left into the alleyway, she would not have been able to see anyone at the top of RFGdM as GM & JW would have blocked her line of sight.
When JW saw the lady in purple it was still daylight. When he was speaking to GM it was dark. He may not have seen Jane coming from the Tapas Bar due to parked cars & he may have been looking at his child when Jane passed behind GM.
Quite why it is still necessary to dispute that Jane did see a man with a child  where & when she stated is beyond me.

[Brietta]

If he was the abductor - well would we be listening to what he says?  He wouldn't admit to being there at that time.  I wouldn't so I assume he wouldn't. 
If he was just a dad passing by - the question still remains did he see Jane looking at him?

SY would have asked him that, I presume.

But in my opinion, after a check for traffic he would start crossing immediately and Jane would have been outwith his peripheral vision.
Did she not say his head was down and she did not see his face?  What she did see was in profile.  So he was not looking downhill towards her.

[Brietta]

Jez was adamant Jane didn't pass him and he was adamant where he was. Jez was facing the side gate so Jane had to pass within feet of his eyeline. He saw Jane dressed in purple when he first ventured out at around 20:30. That is the only time the witness saw Jane that night.

Had Jane turned left onto the path as I believe she could have seen both men and a man crossing the top of the road without any being aware of her. Elementary. There were two routes back so of course the other route is a possibility!

Two witnesses did not see her pass them on a quiet deserted street. That is the important fact that cannot be swept under the carpet. Look at the attempted reconstruction fiasco - you were here Gerry - No I was across the road. What an utter shambles! Do a reconstruction and see the reaction.

Patsy is cleared - one more carrier to go.

"He was adamant that he did not see any one else in the area. When spoken to in reference to Jane Tanner walking by, he again stated that he saw no one." http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm

How do you converse with an individual on a one to one basis when you meet at dusk.  Do you make eye contact while you are speaking or are you gazing all around taking everything in while ignoring the person with whom you are interacting?
If the latter I think you would be acting rudely.

[Robittybob1]

SY would have asked him that, I presume.

But in my opinion, after a check for traffic he would start crossing immediately and Jane would have been outwith his peripheral vision.
Did she not say his head was down and she did not see his face?  What she did see was in profile.  So he was not looking downhill towards her.

You never know who looked first or later.  Jane said the whole episode was over in few seconds. 

[Robittybob1]

Jez was adamant Jane didn't pass him and he was adamant where he was. Jez was facing the side gate so Jane had to pass within feet of his eyeline. He saw Jane dressed in purple when he first ventured out at around 20:30. That is the only time the witness saw Jane that night.

Had Jane turned left onto the path as I believe she could have seen both men and a man crossing the top of the road without any being aware of her. Elementary. There were two routes back so of course the other route is a possibility!

Two witnesses did not see her pass them on a quiet deserted street. That is the important fact that cannot be swept under the carpet. Look at the attempted reconstruction fiasco - you were here Gerry - No I was across the road. What an utter shambles! Do a reconstruction and see the reaction.

Patsy is cleared - one more carrier to go.

"He was adamant that he did not see any one else in the area. When spoken to in reference to Jane Tanner walking by, he again stated that he saw no one." http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm

two people with different accounts, can they both be right or is one confused?  I think that is the question.

[pathfinder73]

If Jane had turned left into the alleyway, she would not have been able to see anyone at the top of RFGdM as GM & JW would have blocked her line of sight.
When JW saw the lady in purple it was still daylight. When he was speaking to GM it was dark. He may not have seen Jane coming from the Tapas Bar due to parked cars & he may have been looking at his child when Jane passed behind GM.
Quite why it is still necessary to dispute that Jane did see a man with a child  where & when she stated is beyond me.

This witness statement differs from Jane. Even at the beginning, things were not adding up! Seeing a man walking past in the direction to the road that leads to Baptista supermarket is at the back of the apartment where the middle path leads to. You could see the man crossing the car park entrance if coming from that direction.

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. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

[misty]

This witness statement differs from Jane. Even at the beginning, things were not adding up! Seeing a man walking past in the direction to the road that leads to Baptista supermarket is at the back of the apartment where the middle path leads to. You could see the man crossing the car park entrance if coming from that direction.

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. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

Mrs Batista was very confused IMO. I get the impression she thought Jane was standing at the front door to her apartment (smoking a cigarette as Amaral believes) looking out onto the car park when she witnessed Tannerman heading towards the supermarket rather than the front of Block 6.

[pathfinder73]

How do you converse with an individual on a one to one basis when you meet at dusk.  Do you make eye contact while you are speaking or are you gazing all around taking everything in while ignoring the person with whom you are interacting?
If the latter I think you would be acting rudely.

Jez turn deaf aswell as blind did he? He had a pram and was not aware of his surroundings on a road LOL. We have his statement of being adamant Jane was not seen. He spotted Jane in purple earlier hanging outside the apartments like Jenny Murat did.

[Robittybob1]

This witness statement differs from Jane. Even at the beginning, things were not adding up! Seeing a man walking past in the direction to the road that leads to Baptista supermarket is at the back of the apartment where the middle path leads to. You could see the man crossing the car park entrance if coming from that direction.

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. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

Where are the notes the PJ or the GNR took of this incident, the translation done by Silvia?   Covering this bit "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"

[pathfinder73]

Mrs Batista was very confused IMO. I get the impression she thought Jane was standing at the front door to her apartment (smoking a cigarette as Amaral believes) looking out onto the car park when she witnessed Tannerman heading towards the supermarket rather than the front of Block 6.

Amaral believes Jane took the path route back and avoided the men which means at the time crecheman said he passed she would have seen him crossing the car park entrance from the back of the apartments NOT the front.

That could explain how Jane saw crecheman and the other men (Gerry/Jez) didn't see her.

[Brietta]

You never know who looked first or later.  Jane said the whole episode was over in few seconds.

If he had been looking at her ... she would have seen his face and would probably not have been able to give such a good description of his hair side and back.

[Brietta]

Mrs Batista was very confused IMO. I get the impression she thought Jane was standing at the front door to her apartment (smoking a cigarette as Amaral believes) looking out onto the car park when she witnessed Tannerman heading towards the supermarket rather than the front of Block 6.

Sounds a bit of a mix max.  From Jane's position she had a clear line of sight to where the man and child were.

[sadie]

I think Amaral was pretty close to Wilkins' cross.

Glad to agree with you.   
Amaral identified the spot that Jez had drawn on his map and also the spot that Jane very definitely identified in the video where she argued with Gerry.  Gerry was remembering incorrectly. 

Maybe he started to cross to speak to Jez when a vehicle appeared and they retired back to the western kerb and pavement and the only part that stuck in Gerrys mind was crossing and a kerb ?

[misty]

Amaral believes Jane took the path route back and avoided the men which means at the time crecheman said he passed she would have seen him crossing the car park entrance from the back of the apartments NOT the front.

That could explain how Jane saw crecheman and the other men (Gerry/Jez) didn't see her.

"Amaral believes" - yep, that about says it all. Just how many people had to be lying for his thesis to fit?
If not one checker went around to the front of the building during that evening, the shutter could have already been raised at 9.05pm, In addition to that, Jane had no reason to be stood in front of Block 5 when JW saw her at around 8.15pm - she would have exited via the rear patio door.

[misty]

Sounds a bit of a mix max.  From Jane's position she had a clear line of sight to where the man and child were.

Yes, Jane has always been quite clear about where she was when she saw Tannerman & the direction in which he was heading, contrary to the nonsense in O Enigma which shows Tannerman walking towards Block 4.

From Sylvia's statement:-
"She doesn't know exactly what was the position of the lady when she saw the man"

So she was guessing.