It has never been explained why Julian Totman was walking the wrong way?

[Brietta]

There's nothing in the files to suggest who 'Crecheman' was, so I think it's unlikely that he was 'found' by a journalist. I think this story is a leak to the Sun, which seems to be the source copied by other newspapers. Why it should be leaked is the question.

Transparently, the relevance is to 'prove' a leak from Operation Grange.

[Robittybob1]

Do we know in which direction Dr Totman was walking ? Has anyone done anything but assume a direction. Clearly neither he nor his wife quoted a direction. The Met are silent on the topic.
There could have been a genuine explicable error in Jane Tanners sighting she obviously confused right and left.
cf where Gerry and Jez were standing.

Why does everyone assume Jane was in error?  When in the end it is her that makes the two correct observations.
1. Gerry and Jez were talking on the road.
2.  A person (who ends up dressed like Totman from her sketch) was seen carrying a child in pyjamas uncovered and with nothing on her feet.

[Alice Purjorick]

Why does everyone assume Jane was in error?  When in the end it is her that makes the two correct observations.
1. Gerry and Jez were talking on the road.
2.  A person (who ends up dressed like Totman from her sketch) was seen carrying a child in pyjamas uncovered and with nothing on her feet.

Do they? everyone as in everyone? That seems improbable.

[G-Unit]

Transparently, the relevance is to 'prove' a leak from Operation Grange.

Is the Sun opposed to Operation Grange then?

[Robittybob1]

Do they? everyone as in everyone? That seems improbable.

Well let's survey the members of the forum.  Is there anyone here who believes what Jane Tanner said she observed was correct?
In particular do they fully believe Jane saw:
1. Gerry and Jez were talking on the road.
2.  A person (who ends up dressed like Totman from her sketch) was seen carrying a child in pyjamas uncovered and with nothing on her feet?
3. This person crossed the road walking from the left to the right.

Does any member know of any person of importance in this case that has wholeheartedly endorsed what Jane reported?

[misty]

Well let's survey the members of the forum.  Is there anyone here who believes what Jane Tanner said she observed was correct?
In particular do they fully believe Jane saw:
1. Gerry and Jez were talking on the road.
2.  A person (who ends up dressed like Totman from her sketch) was seen carrying a child in pyjamas uncovered and with nothing on her feet?
3. This person crossed the road walking from the left to the right.

Does any member know of any person of importance in this case that has wholeheartedly endorsed what Jane reported?

I believe Jane saw what she told the PJ.
I believe DCI Redwood endorsed Jane's sighting when he spoke of how Crecheman & his daughter's clothing was uncannily similar to that of Tannerman + child. What he didn't say was that the two men were actually one & the same.

[Robittybob1]

I believe Jane saw what she told the PJ.
I believe DCI Redwood endorsed Jane's sighting when he spoke of how Crecheman & his daughter's clothing was uncannily similar to that of Tannerman + child. What he didn't say was that the two men were actually one & the same.

Thanks for responding Misty.  I think I understand what you are saying.  So even though Bogart thinks the descriptions are different you agree with Redwood that they are similar.
I'll have to have another listen and reassess.

[misty]

Thanks for responding Misty.  I think I understand what you are saying.  So even though Bogart thinks the descriptions are different you agree with Redwood that they are similar.
I'll have to have another listen and reassess.

Bogart's research is flawed. He threatened a witness who wouldn't answer questions. Whoever he is, he has an agenda which isn't in the interests of Madeleine or justice - which is probably why comments are disabled for all his previous videos on the case.

[John]

Why does everyone assume Jane was in error?  When in the end it is her that makes the two correct observations.
1. Gerry and Jez were talking on the road.
2.  A person (who ends up dressed like Totman from her sketch) was seen carrying a child in pyjamas uncovered and with nothing on her feet.

Well for starters, the Totman girls pyjamas had no frills and were not whitey.  She was carried in a blanket though which would appear to give credibility to the sighting.  Bottom line is though, if Tanner saw Totman then she most certainly didn't see any frills.

It still doesn't answer the questions as to why Totman was apparently going the wrong way but more crucially, why didn't Tanner recognise Dr Totman as he too was a guest and dined regularly in the tapas restaurant?

[G-Unit]

Well for starters, the Totman girls pyjamas had no frills and were not whitey.  She was carried in a blanket though which would appear to give credibility to the sighting.  Bottom line is though, if Tanner saw Totman then she most certainly didn't see any frills.

It still doesn't answer the questions as to why Totman was apparently going the wrong way but more crucially, why didn't Tanner recognise Dr Totman as he too was a guest and dined regularly in the tapas restaurant?

Jane didn't mention frills in her first two statements. In the group timeline the description included 'turn-ups'. The Totman pyjamas looked more like turn-ups than frills. Mind you, she also says that Gerry and Jez were standing 'just up the hill from the gate'
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm

[slartibartfast]

Why does everyone assume Jane was in error?  When in the end it is her that makes the two correct observations.
1. Gerry and Jez were talking on the road.
2.  A person (who ends up dressed like Totman from her sketch) was seen carrying a child in pyjamas uncovered and with nothing on her feet.

There appears to be a tennis connection for all those she saw.

[Robittybob1]

There appears to be a tennis connection for all those she saw.

Was Jez part of the men's social tennis that evening?  I'll have to look at the statements.

[Brietta]

I believe Jane saw what she told the PJ.
I believe DCI Redwood endorsed Jane's sighting when he spoke of how Crecheman & his daughter's clothing was uncannily similar to that of Tannerman + child. What he didn't say was that the two men were actually one & the same.

I think that sums the situation up logically and concisely, Misty.

Jane Tanner saw what she saw and that is exactly what she told the police.

I think it is naive to assume that Operation Grange did not carry out an in depth interview with Dr Totman about what he could remember of the holiday in Luz and in particular what he could remember of the night Madeleine disappeared.

I think it is naive to suppose that any of that interview will be placed in the public domain unless it suits the police purpose.

[Eleanor]

It has crossed my mind that there was some confusion with the layout of Praia da Luz that investigations weren't aware of.  Unless Totman took some ridiculously long route home from the night creche he can't have been the man that Jane Tanner saw.

Do we know at what time Totman left the night creche?

[Robittybob1]

Was Jez part of the men's social tennis that evening?  I'll have to look at the statements.

Jez in his joint statement 05/11/07 makes it clear that he was not involved in the men's social tennis on Thursday evening.
"They went on to explain the events of the 3 May 2007.

He went to play tennis at 1030hrs and noticed Gerry was there. He engaged in general conversation with him as well as a female member of Gerry's group, but he could not name her. After which they all went to the pool. Both Gerry and Kate were present this time and spent the majority of the time talking with the tennis coach. The coach appeared to be talking about her life in general and both Jeremy and Bridget noticed that Gerry and Kate were listening intently to her. Jeremy thought this to be courteous of them considering they did not know her.

At 1230hrs both Jeremy and Bridget went to pick up their children from the creche. They did not have any interaction with the group again that afternoon. They decided to spend the evening in the apartment. Their son was unable to sleep so about 2015hrs, Jeremy took him, in the pushchair ....."