Where were Jez and Gerry standing when they did their talking? Ideas solutions

[Alice Purjorick]

Well ... your post is on topic.  But that is as much as can be said about it ... in my opinion.

In the long term it doesn't really matter.
That nice DCI Redwood (Retd) greased Tannerman over four years ago.
Who stood where and did what with which and to whom has become coffee house chat and rather an irrelevance.
IMO

[Mr Gray]

In the long term it doesn't really matter.
That nice DCI Redwood (Retd) greased Tannerman over four years ago.
Who stood where and did what with which and to whom has become coffee house chat and rather an irrelevance.
IMO

Totally  irrelevant..... And shows all along that JT was an accurate witness...

[Brietta]

In the long term it doesn't really matter.
That nice DCI Redwood (Retd) greased Tannerman over four years ago.
Who stood where and did what with which and to whom has become coffee house chat and rather an irrelevance.
IMO

Even at the time it mattered little where the men were.  It was all about Jane and what she had seen at the top of the road.  Be it Madeleine's abductor ... or be it innocent dad and his family returning home from the creche ... it makes no never mind.  For the very simple reason that neither were traced by the Policia Judiciaria at the time.

[Robittybob1]

Sorry, Rob, but I don't understand your point.

I read that Jane Tanner is aware her memory of the event is changing.
She is aware of the the false memory syndrome therefore did keep reminding everyone just to go back to what she said at the beginning.  She believed what she said wasn't based on altered memories at the beginning 4th.

[misty]

Even at the time it mattered little where the men were.  It was all about Jane and what she had seen at the top of the road.  Be it Madeleine's abductor ... or be it innocent dad and his family returning home from the creche ... it makes no never mind.  For the very simple reason that neither were traced by the Policia Judiciaria at the time.

The family didn't need to be traced. Their names were on the MW booking sheets & in the creche records for the night of the 3rd. The time their daughter was checked out of the creche should have been logged & given what SY discovered in their review it is clear only the most inadequate police force would not have pursued such a basic lead.
I kept asking myself why the family themselves thought they could have been the Tanner sighting, yet apparently failed to come forward before to eliminate Tannerman from the investigation. The main conclusion I came up with was that they were spoken to originally, it was suggested that they could be the sighting but certain elements of their recollections of that night were at odds with Jane's description. (Direction of travel, hair style, height, non-gathered lower hem of fleece/jacket). They were then told to keep quiet in accordance with the judicial secrecy laws.

All MOO.

[G-Unit]

In the long term it doesn't really matter.
That nice DCI Redwood (Retd) greased Tannerman over four years ago.
Who stood where and did what with which and to whom has become coffee house chat and rather an irrelevance.
IMO

In one way it's irrelevant, yes. As a demonstration of what is probably quite a rare phenomenon it's fascinating in my opinion. In the beginning two people pretty much agreed with each other about the location of the men's chat. At the end of the process they still agreed, but only because both had changed the location. 

Assuming there was no discussion between the two people concerned that must be quite unusual imo. Around 20 feet they moved the encounter and both in the same direction and to the same destination.

[Alice Purjorick]

Totally  irrelevant..... And shows all along that JT was an accurate witness...

She accurately saw a man without a face who ultimately had no relevance to the case and most certainly was not the lynch pin that he was portrayed as for six years.

[Alice Purjorick]

In one way it's irrelevant, yes. As a demonstration of what is probably quite a rare phenomenon it's fascinating in my opinion. In the beginning two people pretty much agreed with each other about the location of the men's chat. At the end of the process they still agreed, but only because both had changed the location. 

Assuming there was no discussion between the two people concerned that must be quite unusual imo. Around 20 feet they moved the encounter and both in the same direction and to the same destination.

Amos 3.3.......

[Robittybob1]

Amos 3.3.......

There might be some truth in that:  "Do two walk together unless they have agreed to do so? "  What about handcuffed?

[Alice Purjorick]

There might be some truth in that:  "Do two walk together unless they have agreed to do so? "  What about handcuffed?

What about handcuffed?
I do not think Amos used handcuffs

[Brietta]

The family didn't need to be traced. Their names were on the MW booking sheets & in the creche records for the night of the 3rd. The time their daughter was checked out of the creche should have been logged & given what SY discovered in their review it is clear only the most inadequate police force would not have pursued such a basic lead.
I kept asking myself why the family themselves thought they could have been the Tanner sighting, yet apparently failed to come forward before to eliminate Tannerman from the investigation. The main conclusion I came up with was that they were spoken to originally, it was suggested that they could be the sighting but certain elements of their recollections of that night were at odds with Jane's description. (Direction of travel, hair style, height, non-gathered lower hem of fleece/jacket). They were then told to keep quiet in accordance with the judicial secrecy laws.

All MOO.

I don't think the family were spoken with at the time based on the knowledge that many obvious contacts were ignored ... for example the residents of block five who were in residence the night Madeleine disappeared.

It all appears to have been very haphazard.  Bridget O'Donnell who was in Block 4 was interviewed.  She said  "Through Murat we answered a few questions and gave our details, which the policeman wrote down on the back of a bit of paper. No notebook. Then he pointed to the photocopied picture of Madeleine on the table. "Is this your daughter?" he asked. "Er, no," we said. "That's the girl you are meant to be searching for." My heart sank for the McCanns." https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann

The thought occurs was that a systematic routine visit ... or was it as a result of Jes Wilkin's meeting with Gerry?

[faithlilly]

Even at the time it mattered little where the men were.  It was all about Jane and what she had seen at the top of the road.  Be it Madeleine's abductor ... or be it innocent dad and his family returning home from the creche ... it makes no never mind.  For the very simple reason that neither were traced by the Policia Judiciaria at the time.

Or by the three PI companies employed by the McCanns.

[misty]

I don't think the family were spoken with at the time based on the knowledge that many obvious contacts were ignored ... for example the residents of block five who were in residence the night Madeleine disappeared.

It all appears to have been very haphazard.  Bridget O'Donnell who was in Block 4 was interviewed.  She said  "Through Murat we answered a few questions and gave our details, which the policeman wrote down on the back of a bit of paper. No notebook. Then he pointed to the photocopied picture of Madeleine on the table. "Is this your daughter?" he asked. "Er, no," we said. "That's the girl you are meant to be searching for." My heart sank for the McCanns." https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann

The thought occurs was that a systematic routine visit ... or was it as a result of Jes Wilkin's meeting with Gerry?

IMO Crecheman & his family were spoken to by someone from a police force after receipt of the completed questionnaire. To remember the details Crecheman did, in some detail, at least 4 years down the line would take some doing without the benefit of some sort of written statement given shortly after the event. (The initial Tapas statements show that they had some difficulty remembering what they did each day).

[Brietta]

IMO Crecheman & his family were spoken to by someone from a police force after receipt of the completed questionnaire. To remember the details Crecheman did, in some detail, at least 4 years down the line would take some doing without the benefit of some sort of written statement given shortly after the event. (The initial Tapas statements show that they had some difficulty remembering what they did each day).

Perhaps at home in Britain?  They could have been leaving in the days after Madeleine was taken.

[misty]

Perhaps at home in Britain?  They could have been leaving in the days after Madeleine was taken.

LP sent out 599 questionnaires which were presumably to all UK/Eire holidaymakers who were known to be in Luz on 3/5/07.
Every MW guest who arrived on 28/4/07 was booked in to leave on 5/5/07. http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ARRIVALS.htm Lists 1-7