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

[Robittybob1]

I'll have to go through that tomorrow when I'm fresh, but we seem to have additional layers on this too with Silvia Batista disagreeing where Jane was when she saw the man.

We also have Goncalo Amaral in the O Enigma interview wanting Jane and Russell to be using the alleyway so the man was seen in another place and time.  Wasn't it that his theory then was Jane saw Tannerman on the way back to the  Tapas, crossing the alleyway I presume in the other direction (right to left across her field of vision).

I'm left wondering did it happen at all?

[G-Unit]

I'll have to go through that tomorrow when I'm fresh, but we seem to have additional layers on this too with Silvia Batista disagreeing where Jane was when she saw the man.

We also have Goncalo Amaral in the O Enigma interview wanting Jane and Russell to be using the alleyway so the man was seen in another place and time.  Wasn't it that his theory then was Jane saw Tannerman on the way back to the  Tapas, crossing the alleyway I presume in the other direction (right to left across her field of vision).

I'm left wondering did it happen at all?

Silvia is repeating what Jane told the GNR and what Gerry told the PJ. According to Silvia, this is what Jane told the GNR;

she indicated having seen him passing in the road that was in front of the bedroom window where Madeleine had been, walking in the direction of the road of the road that then goes to the Baptista supermarket.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

So according to Silvia, Jane saw the man before he reached the junction.

According to the PJ officer he spoke only to Gerry who said;

At about 21.20, their friend Jane passed by the apartment (along the corridor of the main entrance) she saw an individual carrying a child who passed descending the road, however she did not recognise this individual, nor the child, only having noticed that the individual appeared to be aged between 30 or 40, had dark hair and light coloured trousers.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR_MARTINS.htm#p15p3862

Those early statements suggest that Jane wasn't on R. Dr F  G Martins when she saw the man, which is a different can of worms imo.

[Brietta]

Silvia is repeating what Jane told the GNR and what Gerry told the PJ. According to Silvia, this is what Jane told the GNR;

she indicated having seen him passing in the road that was in front of the bedroom window where Madeleine had been, walking in the direction of the road of the road that then goes to the Baptista supermarket.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

So according to Silvia, Jane saw the man before he reached the junction.

According to the PJ officer he spoke only to Gerry who said;

At about 21.20, their friend Jane passed by the apartment (along the corridor of the main entrance) she saw an individual carrying a child who passed descending the road, however she did not recognise this individual, nor the child, only having noticed that the individual appeared to be aged between 30 or 40, had dark hair and light coloured trousers.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR_MARTINS.htm#p15p3862

Those early statements suggest that Jane wasn't on R. Dr F  G Martins when she saw the man, which is a different can of worms imo.

Neither is a statement from Jane Tanner ... who has always been quite steadfast in what she witnessed and exactly the location in which she witnessed it.

[Brietta]

In my opinion it's acceptable to suggest anything so long as there are facts which support our suggestions. The fact that Gerry mentions using the front door makes it acceptable to suggest that he was north of the gate when he met Jez. What we can't do imo is work out the truth because people changed their stories.

Taking all the statements in real time this, roughly, is how and when the stories changed.

On 4th May Gerry says he used the front door to check his kids.
That fits with Jane's recollection on 7-8th May that he and Jez were standing north of the garden gate to 5A.
That, however, doesn't fit with Gerry's recollection on the same dates that he exited via that gate and walked south.
So there is a contradiction in the joint timeline.

On 10th May Gerry says he crossed the road to speak to Jez after leaving 5A by the garden gate and walking towards the Tapas reception.
Jane, on 10th May, has now forgotten where she saw the men speaking, despite knowing two or three days earlier when she contributed to the joint timeline.
So we now have Gerry contradicting the other two witnesses. Jane seems to have had her memory wiped.

In November 2007 Jez is interviewed again. He again says that he crossed the road and spoke to Gerry near the gate.
So the situation now is that Gerry and Jez disagree about where they spoke, and Jane can't remember.

When the rogatory interviews take place Jane has recovered her memory, but it's changed. She is now happy to provide a sketch contradicting her first sketch and her evidence in the group timeline. The men were near the alleyway, not the gate!
Jez has also changed his evidence and agrees with Jane.
Gerry, as we know, is still on the other side of the road; all by himself, apparently.
So now Jane and Jez agree on this new location, but not Gerry.

Had these changes not occurred the site of the meeting wouldn't have been very important as Dave Edgar suggests in 'Madeleine was here'. What he and Jane both seem oblivious to, though, is that the site being defended by Jane in that video wasn't mentioned until April 2008. Before that date Jane and Jez agreed that the men spoke near the gate.

  ... in my opinion the only important issue is that Jane had a clear view of the man carry the barefoot child away from the direction of the apartment block from which a barefoot child was later discovered to be missing.

Why is it no-one is the least bit interested in where he was headed?

[pathfinder73]

He did not walk uphill Rob.   That is a myth of your own making.  His statement is very clear and there is nothing about his going uphill.  He was less than 10 metres from the gate going downhill towards the Tapas Reception, when he spotted Jez on the other side of the road going uphill   

... and he thinks that he crossed the road to speak to him.  That is entirely plausible and they probably removed themselves from danger, to the western pavement vy the alleyway,  when a vehicle appeared

AIMO

What vehicle? Cite please.

[barrier]

Neither is a statement from Jane Tanner ... who has always been quite steadfast in what she witnessed and exactly the location in which she witnessed it.

More importantly SY have no interest in this guy,Redwood said " we have identified a British holiday maker  returning to their apartment through the exact same area as the Jane Tanner sighting"adding they are almost certain this was the same guy Tanner saw,thus ruling him out and moving the timeline on,Redwood never said the Tanner sighting is almost certainly the abductor, which is want some want.

[G-Unit]

Neither is a statement from Jane Tanner ... who has always been quite steadfast in what she witnessed and exactly the location in which she witnessed it.

Quite so. it's hearsay. Jane has, however, changed her story over time.

[Brietta]

Quite so. it's hearsay. Jane has, however, changed her story over time.

Jane Tanner has NEVER changed her story.

If you wish to argue that she did ... please support your argument with appropriate cites.

[G-Unit]

  ... in my opinion the only important issue is that Jane had a clear view of the man carry the barefoot child away from the direction of the apartment block from which a barefoot child was later discovered to be missing.

Why is it no-one is the least bit interested in where he was headed?

Firstly, the man's destination is off topic and secondly how can anyone know where he was going? Past block 6 is all we've been told. Perhaps OG will tell us one day.

[G-Unit]

Jane Tanner has NEVER changed her story.

If you wish to argue that she did ... please support your argument with appropriate cites.

Here they all are again;

4th May 2007



7/8th May 2007

2115: JT leaves table, and sees GM talking with fellow resident ("Jez" Wilkins) outside the patio gate of 5A. The two were standing just up the hill from the gate towards Rua A. da Silva Road.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm

10th May 2007

No location given

Rogatory April 2008

But they were talking quite (inaudible), so I just carried on, you know, up, up the road.  I mean, I thought they were, as you’re going up here, I thought they were more, erm, again I know this is where me and Gerry differ, but I thought they were sort of more near the little alleyway.  I think sort of”
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

[Brietta]

Here they all are again;

4th May 2007



7/8th May 2007

2115: JT leaves table, and sees GM talking with fellow resident ("Jez" Wilkins) outside the patio gate of 5A. The two were standing just up the hill from the gate towards Rua A. da Silva Road.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm

10th May 2007

No location given

Rogatory April 2008

But they were talking quite (inaudible), so I just carried on, you know, up, up the road.  I mean, I thought they were, as you’re going up here, I thought they were more, erm, again I know this is where me and Gerry differ, but I thought they were sort of more near the little alleyway.  I think sort of”
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE_TANNER_RIGATORY.htm

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

[Robittybob1]

Quite so. it's hearsay. Jane has, however, changed her story over time.

She is aware of the the false memory syndrome therefore kept reminding everyone just to go back to what she said from the beginning.  They weren't altered memories then.

[Mr Gray]

She is aware of the the false memory syndrome therefore kept reminding everyone just to go back to what she said from the beginning.  They weren't altered memories then.

Nothing to do with false memory syndrome IMO..... It's about not trusting the pj... Imo

[G-Unit]

She is aware of the the false memory syndrome therefore kept reminding everyone just to go back to what she said from the beginning.  They weren't altered memories then.

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

[jassi]

She is aware of the the false memory syndrome therefore kept reminding everyone just to go back to what she said from the beginning.  They weren't altered memories then.

Alternatively she couldn't remember what she'd said earlier, so thought it safety to refer to earlier statement.