CMTV Gonçalo Amaral - O Enigma - with English subtitles

[faithlilly]

If the eye witness did not see the man with Madeleine, what grounds are there for pulling him in when there is another unidentified man + child who was walking in Luz during the critical period? What if they had already taken a statement from him & he'd been checked out?

If he'd been checked out then why were SY still pursuing him under this rather ridiculous ruse ?

[Miss Taken Identity]

If he'd been checked out then why were SY still pursuing him under this rather ridiculous ruse ?

Maybe it was a bank holiday and nothing much to do.

I just want to know how Misty is the only one who has this information about what the SY have been doing- playing with our minds like that just isn't cricket dear chaps.
...waiting for cites, along with democracy in Syria, my lawnmower being returned, and my youngest son eventually admitting he DID crash the car into my newly built wall! (5 years ago).

[G-Unit]

And the supporting information for much of the content of O Enigma is.......?

ETA Please feel free to find all the holes in my theory. When someone can come up with a plausible explanation as to why none of the nannies at the creche recognised Crecheman + child from the description of Tannerman + child in circulation for so many years, I'd be happy to hear it because quite clearly the original investigation never asked the questions.
Crecheman was a MW tourist - yet unrecognised by any of his fellow holidaymakers from the JT description. He went to dinner, then to the creche - still later unrecognised.
The only explanation I can come up with is - Tannerman wasn't Crecheman.

You are accusing Redwood of inventing Crecheman in my opinion. Why did no-one recognise him from JT's
description?

[misty]

If he'd been checked out then why were SY still pursuing him under this rather ridiculous ruse ?

Why didn't the PJ recall Gerry as soon as that 60-80% positive identification was made by MS? Think about it and you'll understand why SY couldn't just pull in a person Crecheman may have identified as being near 5A on 3/5.

[faithlilly]

Why didn't the PJ recall Gerry as soon as that 60-80% positive identification was made by MS? Think about it and you'll understand why SY couldn't just pull in a person Crecheman may have identified as being near 5A on 3/5.

Gerry was already an arguido by that time.

Misty where is your evidence that Crecheman identified anyone?

[misty]

You are accusing Redwood of inventing Crecheman in my opinion. Why did no-one recognise him from JT's
description?

Not at all. Crecheman absolutely exists & provided a genuine statement IMO. The question as to why no-one recognised him  from JT's description is the root of the problem surrounding SY's assertion that he, as the JT sighting, was not the abductor. I have merely attempted to show why I think SY may have been deflecting away from Tannerman & the reasoning behind it.
Should Tannerman actually be one & the same as Crecheman, then it merely serves to highlight another major failure made during the original PJ investigation in not checking out the people who were known to be walking around in OC after collecting their children from the creche. 11 children from 8 families - it was hardly an enormous task compared to visiting over 400 local properties and could have saved years of wondering.

[misty]

Gerry was already an arguido by that time.

Misty where is your evidence that Crecheman identified anyone?

I have never said I have any evidence per se. It is speculation based on the fact that SY elected to reveal Crecheman as Tannerman thus removing that sighting from the equation, yet there remain a few major questions as to how that revelation could be validated. I'm not asking you to believe it.

[faithlilly]

Not at all. Crecheman absolutely exists & provided a genuine statement IMO. The question as to why no-one recognised him  from JT's description is the root of the problem surrounding SY's assertion that he, as the JT sighting, was not the abductor. I have merely attempted to show why I think SY may have been deflecting away from Tannerman & the reasoning behind it.
Should Tannerman actually be one & the same as Crecheman, then it merely serves to highlight another major failure made during the original PJ investigation in not checking out the people who were known to be walking around in OC after collecting their children from the creche. 11 children from 8 families - it was hardly an enormous task compared to visiting over 400 local properties and could have saved years of wondering.

Why did SY publicise him as Tanner's sighting then and all but eliminate him ?

[faithlilly]

I have never said I have any evidence per se. It is speculation based on the fact that SY elected to reveal Crecheman as Tannerman thus removing that sighting from the equation, yet there remain a few major questions as to how that revelation could be validated. I'm not asking you to believe it.

Do you think perhaps SY are satisfied Tannerman is Crecheman and there really is nothing more to it than that ?

[misty]

Do you think perhaps SY are satisfied Tannerman is Crecheman and there really is nothing more to it than that ?

That may well be the case but it doesn't provide answers to our questions, does it? It doesn't explain why Crecheman did absolutely nothing after making his statement/completing the questionnaire while that image was still featuring in the press/on Crimewatch, Panorama etc.

[Eleanor]

Repeating Deleted Comments will result in Warning Points.

[jassi]

Repeating Deleted Comments will result in Warning Points.

Sorry about that, I thought the first time had failed to register.

Why was it removed?

I shall make a complaint if the reason isn't a good one.

[Eleanor]

Sorry about that, I thought the first time had failed to register.

Why was it removed?

I shall make a complaint if the reason isn't a good one.

I am not required to give a reason to you.  But speculating on what another poster might have meant is not acceptable.

[G-Unit]

Why didn't the PJ recall Gerry as soon as that 60-80% positive identification was made by MS? Think about it and you'll understand why SY couldn't just pull in a person Crecheman may have identified as being near 5A on 3/5.

The Prosecutor realised in September 2007 that the time of Madeleine's disappearance had never been confirmed;

whether to confirm or deny its occurrence in relation to the crimes of abduction, homicide, exposure to abandonment and hiding of the body and according to defined plan,it is necessary to document the real time of the disappearance in question, establish the location of each of the intervening parties - from the McCann couple to the group of friends who were on holiday with them in the Ocean Club tourist apartments in Praia da Luz :
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm

The following day Mr Smith contacted UK police to tell them of his suspicions about who he saw on 3rd May. I think that made it imperative that the timeline was examined, because the timeline was Gerry's alibi for the time of the Smith sighting. Accordingly;

In the letter of request sent to the United Kingdom relating to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann it was requested that the witnesses who were on holiday with Madeleine's parents would inform us about their availability to come to Portugal to do a reconstruction, the dates proposed being 28/29 April or 15/16 May
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm

[G-Unit]

Not at all. Crecheman absolutely exists & provided a genuine statement IMO. The question as to why no-one recognised him  from JT's description is the root of the problem surrounding SY's assertion that he, as the JT sighting, was not the abductor. I have merely attempted to show why I think SY may have been deflecting away from Tannerman & the reasoning behind it.
Should Tannerman actually be one & the same as Crecheman, then it merely serves to highlight another major failure made during the original PJ investigation in not checking out the people who were known to be walking around in OC after collecting their children from the creche. 11 children from 8 families - it was hardly an enormous task compared to visiting over 400 local properties and could have saved years of wondering.

If no-one recognised him why are you so sure that he exists?