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

[Robittybob1]

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?

The only excuse I've read so far that being he went home with his daughter and then went out again, is the only one so far that could make Totman walk across the intersection from the left to the right from Jane's perspective.

[G-Unit]

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

No.

[Eleanor]

The only excuse I've read so far that being he went home with his daughter and then went out again, is the only one so far that could make Totman walk across the intersection from the left to the right from Jane's perspective.

So Totman takes his daughter home, puts her down, picks her up again and goes out again.  All before 9.15pm?  Hardly likely, is it.

[G-Unit]

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?

If you mean Operation Grange investigators that would be an inexcusable oversight in my opinion.

Which long route are you thinking of?

We have no evidence showing who used the night creche, let alone the times of drop offs and collections.

[Brietta]

If you mean Operation Grange investigators that would be an inexcusable oversight in my opinion.

Which long route are you thinking of?

We have no evidence showing who used the night creche, let alone the times of drop offs and collections.

Not quite as inexcusable an oversight than the Amaral investigation never having investigated it in the first place I would imagine.

[Eleanor]

Not quite as inexcusable an oversight than the Amaral investigation never having investigated it in the first place I would imagine.

And all of the insults thrown at that poor woman, who obviously wasn't lying at all.

[G-Unit]

Not quite as inexcusable an oversight than the Amaral investigation never having investigated it in the first place I would imagine.

We're not discussing the first investigation though, are we? These are Britain's finest, allegedly, brought in to review that first investigation, find their mistakes and correct them. After two year's work when, presumably, they learned all about it from the files, they seemingly commit an error which every amateur with an interest in the case spots immediately.

There is always the possibility, of course, that the 'mistake' was deliberate for some reason known only to the investigators.

[Vertigo Swirl]

We're not discussing the first investigation though, are we? These are Britain's finest, allegedly, brought in to review that first investigation, find their mistakes and correct them. After two year's work when, presumably, they learned all about it from the files, they seemingly commit an error which every amateur with an interest in the case spots immediately.

There is always the possibility, of course, that the 'mistake' was deliberate for some reason known only to the investigators.

Those aren't the only two options though are they?

[G-Unit]

Those aren't the only two options though are they?

Why ask me? If you have other options in mind just post them.

[Brietta]

We're not discussing the first investigation though, are we? These are Britain's finest, allegedly, brought in to review that first investigation, find their mistakes and correct them. After two year's work when, presumably, they learned all about it from the files, they seemingly commit an error which every amateur with an interest in the case spots immediately.

There is always the possibility, of course, that the 'mistake' was deliberate for some reason known only to the investigators.

We are discussing Dr Totman's evidence in the case of a missing child.

This evidence was not investigated until Operation Grange did so.  It was given to the Policia Judiciaria investigation coordinated by Amaral in May 2007 shortly after Madeleine's disappearance.

If other material evidence of that calibre was ignored in May 2007 in my opinion it goes a long way to explaining why Madeleine was not found.

[pathfinder73]

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

They would look like turn-ups as she first said before she was informed about Madeleine's frills. Jane Tanner saw Totman's child not Madeleine. IMO Smithman was laughing at this sighting to get him off the hook.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Why ask me? If you have other options in mind just post them.

If you've been following the thread you will see that they have already been suggested.

[jassi]

We are discussing Dr Totman's evidence in the case of a missing child.

This evidence was not investigated until Operation Grange did so.  It was given to the Policia Judiciaria investigation coordinated by Amaral in May 2007 shortly after Madeleine's disappearance.

If other material evidence of that calibre was ignored in May 2007 in my opinion it goes a long way to explaining why Madeleine was not found.

Good job that it turned out to be a false lead and OG turned their attentions elsewhere - or so we are led to believe.

[slartibartfast]

And all of the insults thrown at that poor woman, who obviously wasn't lying at all.

Who said lying?

[slartibartfast]

We are discussing Dr Totman's evidence in the case of a missing child.

This evidence was not investigated until Operation Grange did so.  It was given to the Policia Judiciaria investigation coordinated by Amaral in May 2007 shortly after Madeleine's disappearance.

If other material evidence of that calibre was ignored in May 2007 in my opinion it goes a long way to explaining why Madeleine was not found.

Cite for given to the PJ?