Tannerman, Smithman and Christian Brueckner

[G-Unit]

It’s also possible that JT got the direction of travel wrong, the mind can play tricks after traumatic events and it does try to make sense of things, not necessarily always with a great degree of accuracy.  She knew Madeleine had been disappeared, she knew she’d seen a man carrying a child right next to the apartment, in order to connect the two, she simply unconsciously reversed the distance of travel.  I wonder if she would accept that explanation now or not…?

I don't know, she's never really commented has she? The connection with Madeleine was extremely tenuous anyway, based only on a pair of legs.

[Mr Gray]

I don't know, she's never really commented has she? The connection with Madeleine was extremely tenuous anyway, based only on a pair of legs.

Then we have smithman recognising Gerry by the way he carried his son...probably best to leave it to the experts whoo say they have solved the case

[G-Unit]

Then we have smithman recognising Gerry by the way he carried his son...probably best to leave it to the experts whoo say they have solved the case

The child in that sighting did resemble Madeleine, however. I thought you recommended questioning experts rather than accepting their claims?

[Mr Gray]

The child in that sighting did resemble Madeleine, however. I thought you recommended questioning experts rather than accepting their claims?

I always question experts and pretty well everything.... Then look at the evidence to see whether to trust or not

[Venturi Swirl]

I don't know, she's never really commented has she? The connection with Madeleine was extremely tenuous anyway, based only on a pair of legs.

The connection to Madeleine was that the legs appeared to belong to a small female, and coincidentally at around the same time a small female mysteriously disappeared from the apartment right next to where she saw these little legs being carried away.  If it had been you would you have said to yourself: no way could that have been Madeleine or would you have spoken up?

[barrier]

Redwood never revealed the identity of who Tanner saw, that is pure speculation in to who it was, what can be gleaned from it, is that who ever it was never saw anything suspicious at the time this enabled Redwood to move on to Smithman, so where was CB ? not half inching Madeleine out of 5a thats for sure.

[Venturi Swirl]

Redwood never revealed the identity of who Tanner saw, that is pure speculation in to who it was, what can be gleaned from it, is that who ever it was never saw anything suspicious at the time this enabled Redwood to move on to Smithman, so where was CB ? not half inching Madeleine out of 5a thats for sure.

Can you explain the logical process you employed to arrive at this startling revelation?

[G-Unit]

The connection to Madeleine was that the legs appeared to belong to a small female, and coincidentally at around the same time a small female mysteriously disappeared from the apartment right next to where she saw these little legs being carried away.  If it had been you would you have said to yourself: no way could that have been Madeleine or would you have spoken up?

A small child disappeared some time between 5.30pm and 10pm, or between 9pm and 10pm.

[barrier]

Is talking down to others in here your preferred method of answering a civil question? This isn't a school where you get to play teacher!

You'll find if a subject raises even a snippet that the golden suspect to the supporters is not the chosen one, there'll be disruption.

[barrier]

The child in that sighting did resemble Madeleine, however. I thought you recommended questioning experts rather than accepting their claims?

The only one claimed to be as such that night.

[barrier]

I always question experts and pretty well everything.... Then look at the evidence to see whether to trust or not

Rubbish, you're fawning over every word that come from Wolters or the press at the mention of CB.

[Venturi Swirl]

A small child disappeared some time between 5.30pm and 10pm, or between 9pm and 10pm.

As far as JT would have been concerned she disappeared between 9 and 10pm, unless you think she's in on the cover up.

[Venturi Swirl]

You'll find if a subject raises even a snippet that the golden suspect to the supporters is not the chosen one, there'll be disruption.

my post wasn't "disruption" it was pointing out that I don't answer questions posed by those who don't have the good grace to answer mine. 

[Venturi Swirl]

Rubbish, you're fawning over every word that come from Wolters or the press at the mention of CB.

I would class this as disruption by someone who seems to get extremely aerated at the mere mention of the possibility of CB's involvement.

[G-Unit]

As far as JT would have been concerned she disappeared between 9 and 10pm, unless you think she's in on the cover up.

The publicised time of 9.15pm arose out of JT's sighting, of course. Redwood then suggested 9.30pm to 10pm. In reality no-one knows.