CMTV Gonçalo Amaral - O Enigma - with English subtitles

[sadie]

Highly unlikely as no witnesses reported it.

I dont remember any particular vehicles being identified by witnesses, altho I thought that someone did say that Barrington slept in his van there.   No proof of that (haven't the energy) but plenty of proof that he spent time on numerous occasions about the time that Madeleine vanished (very roughly) in Rua Francisco Gentil Martins near the Tapas Recption area and Baptistas supermarket

Proof listed above

[sadie]

If ifs and buts were beer and nuts we'd have ourselves a party.

The solution might be in the detail.

Motto:  Never ignore the little things, they often blossom into bigger things.

[misty]

If Crecheman was who I believe he was, then he was resident in Block 4. JT did not see his wife or a 2nd child. Unless his wife & child had gone to another apartment towards Block 6 & taken their own apartment key with them, I cannot see any reason why Crecheman would have been heading in the wrong direction.
MOO.

[Robittybob1]

Which was totally different to what Redwood said in the link I posted.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24528530

What makes you think it is different?

[barrier]

What makes you think it is different?

Listen to what Redwood said then read what he was supposed to have said,if you can't hear or see it...........

[Robittybob1]

Listen to what Redwood said then read what he was supposed to have said,if you can't hear or see it...........

I asked you a simple question "What makes you think it is different?"   Then you go and give me a task to do. 

[barrier]

I asked you a simple question "What makes you think it is different?"   Then you go and give me a task to do.

Crosses to bear and all that.

[Robittybob1]

Crosses to bear and all that.

I've done my hard labour today already.  I've gone to bed to rest.

[faithlilly]

If Crecheman was who I believe he was, then he was resident in Block 4. JT did not see his wife or a 2nd child. Unless his wife & child had gone to another apartment towards Block 6 & taken their own apartment key with them, I cannot see any reason why Crecheman would have been heading in the wrong direction.
MOO.

Me neither. Makes you wonder why Redwood wanted to shoehorn him into the role and ultimately elimination?  Why Redwood was at such pains to take out of the running a suspect the McCanns had bent over backwards to promote since almost day one ?

[misty]

Me neither. Makes you wonder why Redwood wanted to shoehorn him into the role and ultimately elimination?  Why Redwood was at such pains to take out of the running a suspect the McCanns had bent over backwards to promote since almost day one ?

My own thesis is that Crecheman saw a person/people in the vicinity of Block 5 in the minutes before the JT sighting & was able to provide the Met with a good description. What was missing from that sighting was a child. In order to verify that Crecheman's sighting tallied with JT's sighting & was the positive lead, it was absolutely essential to rule out another unidentified individual seen carrying a young girl some 45mins later.
MOO.

[faithlilly]

My own thesis is that Crecheman saw a person/people in the vicinity of Block 5 in the minutes before the JT sighting & was able to provide the Met with a good description. What was missing from that sighting was a child. In order to verify that Crecheman's sighting tallied with JT's sighting & was the positive lead, it was absolutely essential to rule out another unidentified individual seen carrying a young girl some 45mins later.
MOO.

So you are saying SY basically lied to the public ? Why? Why not just explain what you have written above ?

[misty]

So you are saying SY basically lied to the public ? Why? Why not just explain what you have written above ?

I would call it deflection rather than lying.
Redwood said they were "almost certain" that this was the man JT saw because said man was definitely carrying a child in the vicinity at the relevant time. What Redwood didn't say was that Tannerman had been eliminated from their enquiries.

[Robittybob1]

I would call it deflection rather than lying.
Redwood said they were "almost certain" that this was the man JT saw because said man was definitely carrying a child in the vicinity at the relevant time. What Redwood didn't say was that Tannerman had been eliminated from their enquiries.

This hard to follow Misty.

[faithlilly]

I would call it deflection rather than lying.
Redwood said they were "almost certain" that this was the man JT saw because said man was definitely carrying a child in the vicinity at the relevant time. What Redwood didn't say was that Tannerman had been eliminated from their enquiries.

But why deflect, if that's the way you wish to discribe it, why not simply tell the truth ?

Further if Redwood and co can 'deflect' in this way is it not beyond the realms of possibly that he was 'deflecting' when he and his colleagues said the McCanns were 'not suspects'

[barrier]

But why deflect, if that's the way you wish to discribe it, why not simply tell the truth ?

Further if Redwood and co can 'deflect' in this way is it not beyond the realms of possibly that he was 'deflecting' when he and his colleagues said the McCanns were 'not suspects'

Has it ever been said that they have been eliminated from their enquiries.