CMTV Gonçalo Amaral - O Enigma - with English subtitles

[Brietta]

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.

I don't know how you come up with analyses like these, Misty ... I've never heard of that suggestion before ... and I would never have worked that out for myself.

Certainly a workable solution which ticks all the boxes.

DCI Redwood mentioned the 'family'.  I found that odd because we were conditioned to thinking of a man on his own.

Crechman was therefore going from the creche to his accommodation ... walking in the correct direction unlike Tannerman.

When passing Block 5 ... he got a very good view of an individual or more than one in the vicinity.  Who unbeknown to him were making a move on the apartment in the knowledge that with Gerry's departure there was  window of at least half an hour.

It has been discussed entry and exit would have taken minutes.

The next was Jane witnessing the person or one of the persons seen by crechman carrying a child away.

Explains two such different efits?

Have I got that right?

[G-Unit]

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 Crecheman walked home from the creche to block 4 carrying his child before Jane arrived. He saw someone near block 5. Who was seen by JT shortly after then?

[misty]

So Crecheman walked home from the creche to block 4 carrying his child before Jane arrived. He saw someone near block 5. Who was seen by JT shortly after then?

The man whose description none of the creche staff seemed to have recognised, carrying a little girl with frilly bottomed pyjamas who also apparently couldn't be identified as having been in the creche.

[Robittybob1]

The man whose description none of the creche staff seemed to have recognised, carrying a little girl with frilly bottomed pyjamas who also apparently couldn't be identified as having been in the creche.

Who told you all that?

[misty]

I don't know how you come up with analyses like these, Misty ... I've never heard of that suggestion before ... and I would never have worked that out for myself.

Certainly a workable solution which ticks all the boxes.

DCI Redwood mentioned the 'family'.  I found that odd because we were conditioned to thinking of a man on his own.

Crechman was therefore going from the creche to his accommodation ... walking in the correct direction unlike Tannerman.

When passing Block 5 ... he got a very good view of an individual or more than one in the vicinity.  Who unbeknown to him were making a move on the apartment in the knowledge that with Gerry's departure there was  window of at least half an hour.

It has been discussed entry and exit would have taken minutes.

The next was Jane witnessing the person or one of the persons seen by crechman carrying a child away.

Explains two such different efits?

Have I got that right?

I'm not sure about the two different efits part but the rest, yes, explained more clearly than I did.

[misty]

Who told you all that?

Because none of the nannies have come forward to say so, despite the description of the alleged abductor having been in the public domain for so long.

[misty]

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'

How could they tell the truth if they weren't sure that Crecheman had seen the alleged abductor(s)?

[stephen25000]

How could they tell the truth if they weren't sure that Crecheman had seen the alleged abductor(s)?

So allegedly seeing the alleged abductor.

[Robittybob1]

Because none of the nannies have come forward to say so, despite the description of the alleged abductor having been in the public domain for so long.

They may have approached OG therefore they have done their thing.

[misty]

They may have approached OG therefore they have done their thing.

That does not explain why the PJ apparently failed to look at the people who collected their children from the creche between 9pm & 9.15pm or ask the 3 nannies about them. It was left to OG to discover the information years down the line from the family statement so it is clear no nanny approached OG.

[G-Unit]

The man whose description none of the creche staff seemed to have recognised, carrying a little girl with frilly bottomed pyjamas who also apparently couldn't be identified as having been in the creche.

I thought you said crecheman went from the creche to block 4. Now you say he didn't come from the creche?

[misty]

I thought you said crecheman went from the creche to block 4. Now you say he didn't come from the creche?

Crecheman did come from the creche. He reportedly had one of their blankets. He just did not fit the description of the man JT saw, possibly because his hairstyle was wrong, his clothing may not have been the same & if it was the person I believe, he was significantly taller than Tannerman.
MOO.

[G-Unit]

Crecheman did come from the creche. He reportedly had one of their blankets. He just did not fit the description of the man JT saw, possibly because his hairstyle was wrong, his clothing may not have been the same & if it was the person I believe, he was significantly taller than Tannerman.
MOO.

He appeared to still have their blanket six years later. None of the nannies, even Charlotte Pennington, has ever confirmed that he collected his child either. Why did Redwood try to convince the public (with photos too) that he was the man seen by JT then?

[faithlilly]

Crecheman did come from the creche. He reportedly had one of their blankets. He just did not fit the description of the man JT saw, possibly because his hairstyle was wrong, his clothing may not have been the same & if it was the person I believe, he was significantly taller than Tannerman.
MOO.

So the photograph of the man publicised by SY as the father who had come forward was actually the man seen by the father who had come forward. Have I got that correct?

[faithlilly]

Crecheman did come from the creche. He reportedly had one of their blankets. He just did not fit the description of the man JT saw, possibly because his hairstyle was wrong, his clothing may not have been the same & if it was the person I believe, he was significantly taller than Tannerman.
MOO.

Sorry duplicate post.