Is It Possible For A Non Professional Investigator To Solve The Case?

[Holly Goodhead]

The fact it took so long for investigators, Portuguese and/or British, to rule out 'Tannerman' shows they are not on top of their game. 

Much evidence existed in the very days not to overplay this sighting:

- The fact a night creche operated in the self-contained resort catering for holiday makers in accommodation scattered about meant that it wasn't an unusual sight to observe men (dads) walking around with babes in arms.

- The S&R scent dogs did not track to the direction of 'Tannerman'. 

[Holly Goodhead]

Once DCI Redwood became almost certain he had ruled out 'Tannerman' as an entirely innocent British holiday maker he homed in on 'Smithman'.  Why?

- The fact a night creche operated in the self-contained resort catering for holiday makers in accommodation scattered about meant that it wasn't an unusual sight to observe men (dads) walking around with babes in arms.

- The S&R scent dogs did not track to the direction of 'Smithman'.

Is this the best Op Grange can come up with given the resources: headcount of 30 and some 11 million pounds?

[jassi]

The fact it took so long for investigators, Portuguese and/or British, to rule out 'Tannerman' shows they are not on top of their game. 

Much evidence existed in the very days not to overplay this sighting:

- The fact a night creche operated in the self-contained resort catering for holiday makers in accommodation scattered about meant that it wasn't an unusual sight to observe men (dads) walking around with babes in arms.

- The S&R scent dogs did not track to the direction of 'Tannerman'.

I thought that the Portuguese had discarded Tannerman almost from the start and that it was only the McCanns that  claimed he was the abductor.

[Holly Goodhead]

I thought that the Portuguese had discarded Tannerman almost from the start and that it was only the McCanns that  claimed he was the abductor.

I believe the PJ didn't put much weight on 'Tannerman' on the basis the scent dogs didn't track in that direction but they didn't seem to tie in Dr T and Mrs T saying they thought Dr T was probably the man JT claims to have observed. 

And I haven't heard any investigator/forensic scientist say 'Tannerman' and 'Smithman' might well be red herrings on the basis of how the night creche operated.

[ShiningInLuz]

Once DCI Redwood became almost certain he had ruled out 'Tannerman' as an entirely innocent British holiday maker he homed in on 'Smithman'.  Why?

- The fact a night creche operated in the self-contained resort catering for holiday makers in accommodation scattered about meant that it wasn't an unusual sight to observe men (dads) walking around with babes in arms.

- The S&R scent dogs did not track to the direction of 'Smithman'.

Is this the best Op Grange can come up with given the resources: headcount of 30 and some 11 million pounds?

Smithman was walking about in a part of Luz which is totally unconnected to the OC.

The OC is not a self-contained resort.  It sprawls over a large swathe of Luz, most of which is public access.

And you seem to be relying heavily on the SAR dogs.

[Holly Goodhead]

Smithman was walking about in a part of Luz which is totally unconnected to the OC.

The OC is not a self-contained resort.  It sprawls over a large swathe of Luz, most of which is public access.

And you seem to be relying heavily on the SAR dogs.

I didn't say OC is a self-contained resort.  I said

"The fact a night creche operated in the self-contained resort catering for holiday makers in accommodation scattered about meant that it wasn't an unusual sight to observe men (dads) walking around with babes in arms".

I'm relying on the above coupled with the fact that S&R dogs did not scent in the direction of 'Tannerman' or 'Smithman'. 

What are you relying on if you believe these sightings are anything more than red herrings?

[barrier]

Once DCI Redwood became almost certain he had ruled out 'Tannerman' as an entirely innocent British holiday maker he homed in on 'Smithman'.  Why?


Is this the best Op Grange can come up with given the resources: headcount of 30 and some 11 million pounds?

Once Tannerman was out of the equation what else was there,they then went onto digging up the countryside in the mistaken belief for some reason (that one presumes Smithman buried the girl there),they weren't looking for stolen property from any burglary.


@Holly does your theory happen in between these two sighting's.

[Holly Goodhead]

Once Tannerman was out of the equation what else was there,they then went onto digging up the countryside in the mistaken belief for some reason (that one presumes Smithman buried the girl there),they weren't looking for stolen property from any burglary.


@Holly does your theory happen in between these two sighting's.

A detailed analysis of all available info seeking further info as and when required.

I cannot be sure of the time as I don't find any of  the T9 testimony reliable in this regard.  I'm not convinced GM physically checked the children at circa 9 pm and I'm not convinced the others were checking as regularly as they claim and/or they were checking round the front via locked doors. 

[barrier]

A detailed analysis of all available info seeking further info as and when required.

I cannot be sure of the time as I don't find any of  the T9 testimony reliable in this regard.  I'm not convinced GM physically checked the children at circa 9 pm and I'm not convinced the others were checking as regularly as they claim and/or they were checking round the front via locked doors.

There was nothing in between,who ever Redwood found did not see anything suspicious at the time of the tanner sighting,that allowed the timeline to move on.

[Holly Goodhead]

There was nothing in between,who ever Redwood found did not see anything suspicious at the time of the tanner sighting,that allowed the timeline to move on.

I meant a detailed analysis of the whole case not just homing in on what might well be red herrings.

[ShiningInLuz]

I didn't say OC is a self-contained resort.  I said

"The fact a night creche operated in the self-contained resort catering for holiday makers in accommodation scattered about meant that it wasn't an unusual sight to observe men (dads) walking around with babes in arms".

I'm relying on the above coupled with the fact that S&R dogs did not scent in the direction of 'Tannerman' or 'Smithman'. 

What are you relying on if you believe these sightings are anything more than red herrings?

You have just quoted yourself calling it a self-contained resort.

[Brietta]

A detailed analysis of all available info seeking further info as and when required.

I cannot be sure of the time as I don't find any of  the T9 testimony reliable in this regard.  I'm not convinced GM physically checked the children at circa 9 pm and I'm not convinced the others were checking as regularly as they claim and/or they were checking round the front via locked doors.

In my opinion it is not possible for you to be in possession of enough information to make judgements such as you express in your posts for the simple reason that, unlike the present investigators of the Judicial Police and Scotland Yard, you do not have all the information to enable you to pontificate.
They have the information and unlike the investigators of 2007 there is evidence available that they have actually used it.

The information in the files available on the internet reflect a moment in time frozen in aspic.  There were many more individuals in Luz on the 3rd May 2007 than those you have chosen to 'investigate' and much more information from the time and the subsequent years thereafter.
Neither Mr and Mrs Moyes or Mrs Fenn were checked out at the time despite being in the building from which Madeleine disappeared, or in the days following ... hardly standard police procedure one would imagine.

I think you have fallen into the elephant pit of sceptics which fails to take account that there were more people in Luz than Madeleine's parents and their friends and although they kept quiet about it until a fortnight after the event ... the Smith family.

[Holly Goodhead]

In my opinion it is not possible for you to be in possession of enough information to make judgements such as you express in your posts for the simple reason that, unlike the present investigators of the Judicial Police and Scotland Yard, you do not have all the information to enable you to pontificate.
They have the information and unlike the investigators of 2007 there is evidence available that they have actually used it.

The information in the files available on the internet reflect a moment in time frozen in aspic.  There were many more individuals in Luz on the 3rd May 2007 than those you have chosen to 'investigate' and much more information from the time and the subsequent years thereafter.
Neither Mr and Mrs Moyes or Mrs Fenn were checked out at the time despite being in the building from which Madeleine disappeared, or in the days following ... hardly standard police procedure one would imagine.

I think you have fallen into the elephant pit of sceptics which fails to take account that there were more people in Luz than Madeleine's parents and their friends and although they kept quiet about it until a fortnight after the event ... the Smith family.

Unlike many of your posts the case is simple and straightforward. 

Only a handful of people could possibly know:

- MM was in 5A
- 5A was unsecured
- The McCanns were exiting and entering via the unlocked patio doors
- MM was without adult supervision
- 5A was without a baby monitor

I'm not going to give you any further clues.  Consider who knew the above and then filter them out and there's your answer.

[Holly Goodhead]

You have just quoted yourself calling it a self-contained resort.

Where have I said OC is a self-contained resort?

[G-Unit]

Unlike many of your posts the case is simple and straightforward. 

Only a handful of people could possibly know:

- MM was in 5A
- 5A was unsecured
- The McCanns were exiting and entering via the unlocked patio doors
- MM was without adult supervision
- 5A was without a baby monitor

I'm not going to give you any further clues.  Consider who knew the above and then filter them out and there's your answer.

On 3rd May I would say the only people who could definitely answer all those questions were MM's parents.