CMTV Gonçalo Amaral - O Enigma - with English subtitles

[sadie]

Was he walking down toward the supermarket to cross her field of view from the left to the right?  Therefore he wasn't heading towards Murat's house at all then?
Which direction was he walking? Name the road?  Rua Dr. Augustino or  Rua Dr. Gentil Martins or neither of these.

One of the points of Jane identifying Robert Murat was that the person seen may have been Robert Murat walking toward his residence.  That tends to define the location and direction doesn't it?  Is this another of Amaral multi  pronged theories one of which could be correct if he comes up with enough of them.

I think that as jane was only able to show the back of his head (part side view), that he was walking tiowards Murats house.  Had he been walking in the direction of the man supposedly returning from the creche to his appartment, she would have had an three quarter full face view of him.  That she obviously didn't have

[pathfinder73]

There no comparison IMO.  They had to choose one of the remembered places - and they chose Gerry's.

Amaral on the other hand -  ignored the evidence of all three witnesses and HE decided to place them where HE wanted them to be.   It cannot be ignored that his depiction was completely untrue -and imo it doesn't take rocket science to see why he would do that.       

 IMO Once Murat was off the hook and he turned his full attention onto the McCanns - JT's sighting became thoroughly inconvenient to his 'theory'.      In my opinion, after reading his book and from what he has said about JT in interviews - his aim was to discredit her as a witness because of that.

What other reason could there be.

AIMHO

Jane Tanner kept changing her mind. First it was overweight clean shaven Murat then it was skinny hairy George Harrison - they don't look alike at all! Finally the truth was discovered by SY and the man Jane saw was cleared. A detective is not going to believe the words of a suspect not cleared as being the truth until they have fully investigated it. You would have to be a gullible fool to think otherwise.

[stephen25000]

Murat looks nothing like David Payne.

They strongly resemble each other.

[misty]

They strongly resemble each other.

Not when you've left one sitting at the dining table they don't.

[misty]

Let it all out Misty - now do you feel better? There are two routes back so both are a possibility.

To suggest that JT did not take the route she reported in her witness testimonies is libellous without proof to the contrary.

[Benice]

Jane Tanner kept changing her mind. First it was overweight clean shaven Murat then it was skinny hairy George Harrison - they don't look alike at all! Finally the truth was discovered by SY and the man Jane saw was cleared. A detective is not going to believe the words of a suspect not cleared as being the truth until they have fully investigated it. You would have to be a gullible fool to think otherwise.

JT did not change her mind.  She never once identified Murat as the man she had seen.   The George Harrison face was not composed from her description.     She didn't see his face and so could not possibly describe it.   IIRC JT and another person both gave the artist their separate descriptions which were then combined by the artist to form one full length picture - which JT considered to be 80% accurate.    She could not say it was 100% accurate because she did not see 100% of the man.  - i.e. she didn't see his face.
IMO

(from memory - so am happy to be corrected if necessary)

[faithlilly]

There no comparison IMO.  They had to choose one of the remembered places - and they chose Gerry's.

Amaral on the other hand -  ignored the evidence of all three witnesses and HE decided to place them where HE wanted them to be.   It cannot be ignored that his depiction was completely untrue -and imo it doesn't take rocket science to see why he would do that.       

 IMO Once Murat was off the hook and he turned his full attention onto the McCanns - JT's sighting became thoroughly inconvenient to his 'theory'.      In my opinion, after reading his book and from what he has said about JT in interviews - his aim was to discredit her as a witness because of that.

What other reason could there be.

AIMHO

Firstly I believe where Amaral placed Jez and company is exactly where Jez himself said they were.

Secondly can you hazard a guess why when two of the witnesses agree the position of the main protagonists it was decided that the third witness was correct in his recollection ? Let me put it this way Benice, if there are five witnesses to an accident and four of them claim the accident happened in a certain way but the fifth disagrees who's opinion do you think would carry the greater weight?

[Brietta]

Firstly I believe where Amaral placed Jez and company is exactly where Jez himself said they were.

Secondly can you hazard a guess why when two of the witnesses agree the position of the main protagonists it was decided that the third witness was correct in his recollection ? Let me put it this way Benice, if there are five witnesses to an accident and four of them claim the accident happened in a certain way but the fifth disagrees who's opinion do you think would carry the greater weight?

In my opinion in this instance the men were bit players.  Jane Tanner was the witness.  She witnessed the men in conversation.  She witnessed the child carrier at the top of the street ahead of her.

What exactly did the men see?  Jeremy's son and each other.

Jane also corroborated Jeremy's statement and Gerry's statement that they met and had a brief conversation.

She is a very important witness.

[Benice]

Firstly I believe where Amaral placed Jez and company is exactly where Jez himself said they were.

Secondly can you hazard a guess why when two of the witnesses agree the position of the main protagonists it was decided that the third witness was correct in his recollection ? Let me put it this way Benice, if there are five witnesses to an accident and four of them claim the accident happened in a certain way but the fifth disagrees who's opinion do you think would carry the greater weight?

Jez did not place himself, his buggy and Gerry in the middle of the pavement in the path of JT who had to move slightly to avoid brushing against one of them as she passed.   

I have no idea why they decided to use Gerry's recollection of where he stood in the video as I was not privy to the discussions.

IMO because both JT and Jez have similar recollections - then I think they were probably right and Gerry was wrong.

None of that makes any difference to the fact that Amarals depiction of where they stood is not from the witness statements,  it was his own invention - for his own reasons - and is derogatory to JT as it makes a mockery of her description of where Gerry and Jez stood.    IMO It also makes a mockery out of his claim that his theory was based on the files.  None the allegations, sneers etc which he makes about JT in order to discredit her as a witness can be found in the files.

IMO



 

[slartibartfast]

To suggest that JT did not take the route she reported in her witness testimonies is libellous without proof to the contrary.

It would be libellous to suggest she lied but not to suggest she may be mistaken.

[pathfinder73]

Jez did not place himself, his buggy and Gerry in the middle of the pavement in the path of JT who had to move slightly to avoid brushing against one of them as she passed.   

I have no idea why they decided to use Gerry's recollection of where he stood in the video as I was not privy to the discussions.

IMO because both JT and Jez have similar recollections - then I think they were probably right and Gerry was wrong.

None of that makes any difference to the fact that Amarals depiction of where they stood is not from the witness statements,  it was his own invention - for his own reasons - and is derogatory to JT as it makes a mockery of her description of where Gerry and Jez stood.    IMO It also makes a mockery out of his claim that his theory was based on the files.  None the allegations, sneers etc which he makes about JT in order to discredit her as a witness can be found in the files.

IMO

When did Jane say she had to avoid them and brush past?

Fact is Jane couldn't remember passing them because she said she would have given Gerry stick for being gone so long. That did not happen from your reliable witness - she cannot remember the full details as she is not sure what actually happened! God knows how you can believe she could brush past two people on a quiet deserted street without either noticing her. That is too daft for words. Jez was adamant Jane did not pass him.

[faithlilly]

In my opinion in this instance the men were bit players.  Jane Tanner was the witness.  She witnessed the men in conversation.  She witnessed the child carrier at the top of the street ahead of her.

What exactly did the men see?  Jeremy's son and each other.

Jane also corroborated Jeremy's statement and Gerry's statement that they met and had a brief conversation.

She is a very important witness.

No she isn't. SY have all but excluded the man allegedly seen by Tanner as a suspect. Tanner's sighting has not relevance whatsoever.

Pity though that the McCanns PIs chose to back Tanner's sighting instead of the one SY is now following. Lack of funds was cited. Enough money to sue but not to follow up important leads it would appear.

[Brietta]

[Brietta]

No she isn't. SY have all but excluded the man allegedly seen by Tanner as a suspect. Tanner's sighting has not relevance whatsoever.

Pity though that the McCanns PIs chose to back Tanner's sighting instead of the one SY is now following. Lack of funds was cited. Enough money to sue but not to follow up important leads it would appear.

Please remember to add caveats when stating opinions.  Facts require cites.  Thank you

[pathfinder73]

I's a contradiction because Tanner did not flip-flop over them. Do a reconstruction if you have doubts. Tannerman is cleared, the other sighting of efits not released for years is not.