Crecheman's identity finally revealed

[ShiningInLuz]

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS_BOOKING.htm

Having rechecked this, it appears the Totmans were booked in at Tapas for 7pm, 2+1, on Tuesday evening.  Presumably this meant their other child was being cared for separately.

There is no booking at the Tapas for the Totmans on Wednesday or Thursday.

This implies eat-in (from supermarket food or a take-away), out in Luz (to one of the many family-friendly options on offer) or the Millennium.  None of these sits comfortably with a child in the crèche.

[Montclair]

You asked for a cite and you were given one.

Isn’t it strange Totman doesn’t mention seeing either Tanner, Gerry was Wilkins, especially if Gerry was on the opposite side of the road from the apartment as he claimed.

Especially as Totman knew Gerry from playing tennis with him.

[Mr Gray]

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAPAS_BOOKING.htm

Having rechecked this, it appears the Totmans were booked in at Tapas for 7pm, 2+1, on Tuesday evening.  Presumably this meant their other child was being cared for separately.

There is no booking at the Tapas for the Totmans on Wednesday or Thursday.

This implies eat-in (from supermarket food or a take-away), out in Luz (to one of the many family-friendly options on offer) or the Millennium.  None of these sits comfortably with a child in the crèche.

They may well have chosen not to take their daughter out and left  her at the creche... Simple

[misty]

If the PJ did indeed have knowledge of Dr. Totman's original comments & later ones (in whatever form to LP) did they dismiss him as being Tannerman because he was going in the wrong direction? In the event of all this being in the files, what was really DCI's revelation moment after speaking to the family as surely none of this was new information which would prompt the PJ to reopen their investigation?

[John]

I must say, I find the Tanner/Totman claims all very weird.  Wasn't this Dr Julian Totman supposed to have taken part in the organised tennis activities?  He also had children who attended the day and night creches.  No doubt he used the restaurant just as the tapas 9 did.

Given all this, surely Tanner would have encountered Totman during the holiday and recognised him on the night Madeleine disappeared?

[Mr Gray]

Is all this information  from an article in the Sun.... How accurate is it

[Carana]

From the McCanns and the Conman.

Tim Craig-Harvey: My understanding is that it was felt that she wasn't as credible a witness as we had hoped. Witnesses will give evidence thinking that that is what they saw or understood at the time which is quite often inaccurate. And so Jane Tanner having said “This is the guy that I saw”, it may just have been that she so wanted to help that she fooled herself.

Could you post the bit preceding that so it's clear who this Tim person was referring to as "he"?

[pathfinder73]

If the PJ did indeed have knowledge of Dr. Totman's original comments & later ones (in whatever form to LP) did they dismiss him as being Tannerman because he was going in the wrong direction? In the event of all this being in the files, what was really DCI's revelation moment after speaking to the family as surely none of this was new information which would prompt the PJ to reopen their investigation?

He may not have been going in the wrong direction if he was on his way to the creche to collect his son. One needs to keep an open mind. SY know and that's all that matters. It is important to know if he saw any of the other 3 only metres away when crossing as he would have checked to his right lol.

[misty]

He may not have been going in the wrong direction if he was on his way to the creche to collect his son. One needs to keep an open mind. SY know and that's all that matters. It is important to know if he saw any of the other 3 only metres away when crossing as he would have checked to his right lol.

I don't understand the logic in carrying one sleeping child back to the creche, from where he just collected her, to collect his other child. Where was his wife?

[faithlilly]

Could you post the bit preceding that so it's clear who this Tim person was referring to as "he"?

Tim Craig-Harvey: She was then presented with a photograph of this guy George in the market at which point she broke down and said “That is the guy that I saw carrying the child”. This was a pretty strong indication that the guy who had been seen in Portugal, had an integral role in the disappearance of Madeleine. It was extraordinary to be in the room next door on my own, listening to the conversation, and to be part of her reaction.

[Robittybob1]

The PIs believed the fund resources should have been focused on Smithman. They felt Tanner was an unreliable witness

Opinion as fact - you have been asked for a cite.  Could be hard to find.

[Robittybob1]

Is the direction Dr Totman was travelling in stated anywhere, quite unequivocally, in any document of standing ?

None that I'm aware of.

[pathfinder73]

I don't understand the logic in carrying one sleeping child back to the creche, from where he just collected her, to collect your other child. Where was his wife?

Maybe she went ahead to the creche. Maybe he took the child back but she couldn't sleep so he took her back out. There are a number of possibilities with the tapas being so close to their apartment. SY will know what actually happened and what he saw when looking to his right.

[Robittybob1]

From the McCanns and the Conman.

Tim Craig-Harvey: My understanding is that it was felt that she wasn't as credible a witness as we had hoped. Witnesses will give evidence thinking that that is what they saw or understood at the time which is quite often inaccurate. And so Jane Tanner having said “This is the guy that I saw”, it may just have been that she so wanted to help that she fooled herself.

And he could be wrong about Jane.  On it goes!

[Vertigo Swirl]

Maybe she went ahead to the creche. Maybe he took the child back but she couldn't sleep so he took her back out. There are a number of possibilities with the tapas being so close to their apartment. SY will know what actually happened and what he saw when looking to his right.

If he looked right and there was no one there then they will know that he couldn't have been the man JT says she saw.  JT can surely not be credited with knowing Julian Totman crossed that street if she was not in the vicinity at the time!