Author Topic: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?  (Read 24524 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #75 on: January 31, 2021, 01:08:26 PM »
Its not always a conspiracy. Maybe she is just mistaken.
And maybe she's not.  And maybe you're mistaken that it was Cat Baker.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #76 on: January 31, 2021, 01:10:05 PM »
And maybe she's not.  And maybe you're mistaken that it was Cat Baker.

Absolutely.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #77 on: January 31, 2021, 01:18:03 PM »
The word Jassi used was "established".

So what

Offline faithlilly

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #78 on: January 31, 2021, 01:24:04 PM »
Do you have cites for the investigation into Tasmin’s sighting please?  Yes Tasmin’s father said the police were far more interested in other suspects including the McCanns to pay too much interest in hers.  As he was lthere at the time (aand still lives there I believe) I suspect he is better placed to know how seriously the police took his daughter’s statement than you.  In any case if common sense should tell us the sighting was not relevant then surely you should only have criticism for any police force that wasted any time investigating it?

With the greatest respect Tasmin’s father is simply wrong as a quick search of the PJ files prove. Again, what did you expect them to do?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #79 on: January 31, 2021, 01:26:40 PM »
So what

You are quite hard of comprehension today aren't you. You answered

"I don't think that would have been a better answer at all because it ignores the evidence that suggests he was there..."

If Jassi had asked

“Is there any evidence that Ney was even in Portugal in 2007 ! then your answer would have been perfect.

But to the question

“Has it been established that Ney was even in Portugal in 2007 !

The answer of “It has never been established that Martin Ney was in Portugal in 2007 to my knowledge"  would have been more accurate

Don't you agree.



Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #80 on: January 31, 2021, 01:32:00 PM »
With the greatest respect Tasmin’s father is simply wrong as a quick search of the PJ files prove. Again, what did you expect them to do?
Doing what you claim they already did - so do you have a cite for the police follow up work on Tasmin's sighting?  That is interviewing individuals matching her description and whereabouts at the time and eliminating (or otherwise) them from the investigation?
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline faithlilly

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #81 on: January 31, 2021, 01:46:03 PM »
Doing what you claim they already did - so do you have a cite for the police follow up work on Tasmin's sighting?  That is interviewing individuals matching her description and whereabouts at the time and eliminating (or otherwise) them from the investigation?

They would need individuals who matched the description to do that. Were there any?

As I have already posted the PJ files is a good source of information on Tasmin’s sighting...her statement is there, an efit based on her sighting, letters seeking additional information between police forces. Go and have a look, I’m sure you’ll find it interesting.

BTW does Tasmin’s father say that OG or Wolter has approached her for additional information or her view on the man she saw being Brueckner ?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #82 on: January 31, 2021, 01:48:27 PM »
They would need individuals who matched the description to do that. Were there any?

As I have already posted the PJ files is a good source of information on Tasmin’s sighting...her statement is there, an efit based on her sighting, letters seeking additional information between police forces. Go and have a look, I’m sure you’ll find it interesting.

BTW does Tasmin’s father say that OG or Wolter has approached her for additional information or her view on the man she saw being Brueckner ?
So no cites from you then to demonstrate the superhuman effort the police made to trace individuals matching Tasmin's photofit and eliminate them from their enquiries?  But of course why would they go to all that bother when common sense tells us it was just some guy waiting for his girlfriend to pick him up to go to Aldi or something equally as innocuous.  You know what Tasmin's father said - it's all in the article you linked to.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #83 on: January 31, 2021, 01:51:13 PM »
Has it been established that Ney was even in Portugal in 2007 ?

By the way to answer the original question. Martin Ney was employed by a Protestant foundation from 2000 to 2008, he fostered problem children in a flat supplied by the foundation. If indeed Martin Ney was in Portugal in May 2007 the German police must have surely checked his employment record for this period to see if he was on holiday or indeed had no children in his care at that time.
And with all these eye witnesses of Martin Ney no one mentions his height, he is 1.96m, nearly 6 foot 4 and a half, that surely would be the first thing you would comment on.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #84 on: January 31, 2021, 01:57:55 PM »
By the way to answer the original question. Martin Ney was employed by a Protestant foundation from 2000 to 2008, he fostered problem children in a flat supplied by the foundation. If indeed Martin Ney was in Portugal in May 2007 the German police must have surely checked his employment record for this period to see if he was on holiday or indeed had no children in his care at that time.
And with all these eye witnesses of Martin Ney no one mentions his height, he is 1.96m, nearly 6 foot 4 and a half, that surely would be the first thing you would comment on.
So if he is going to be questioned in connection with the Madeleine McCann case as we have been led to believe then presumably he WAS in Portugal at the time of the disappearance, unless the police are really stupid of course and haven't bothered to check this detail.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #85 on: January 31, 2021, 02:01:36 PM »
So if he is going to be questioned in connection with the Madeleine McCann case as we have been led to believe then presumably he WAS in Portugal at the time of the disappearance, unless the police are really stupid of course and haven't bothered to check this detail.

Don't you think its all paper talk? If the German police know he was in Portugal that knowledge would presumably be out. All this speculation is linked to the e-fit that resembles him imo, but who drew the e-fit, was it Mrs Fenn's niece.

Offline faithlilly

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #86 on: January 31, 2021, 02:05:49 PM »
So no cites from you then to demonstrate the superhuman effort the police made to trace individuals matching Tasmin's photofit and eliminate them from their enquiries?  But of course why would they go to all that bother when common sense tells us it was just some guy waiting for his girlfriend to pick him up to go to Aldi or something equally as innocuous.  You know what Tasmin's father said - it's all in the article you linked to.

I’m sure I didn’t say superhuman but they certainly followed up the sighting.

And to my question that would be a no. Neither OG nor the current German investigation thought Tasmin’s sighting was of sufficient importance to question her again. Imagine if Wolter had interviewed her....she could have placed Brueckner at 5a on the day. Imagine how much stronger his case would have been if that connection could have been made.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #87 on: January 31, 2021, 02:06:24 PM »
Don't you think its all paper talk? If the German police know he was in Portugal that knowledge would presumably be out. All this speculation is linked to the e-fit that resembles him imo, but who drew the e-fit, was it Mrs Fenn's niece.
No idea.  Pointless speculating.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Mr Gray

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #88 on: January 31, 2021, 02:07:54 PM »
Don't you think its all paper talk? If the German police know he was in Portugal that knowledge would presumably be out. All this speculation is linked to the e-fit that resembles him imo, but who drew the e-fit, was it Mrs Fenn's niece.

he may well be part of the invstigation...we dont know

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: How Can We Be Sure Tasmin Silence’s Sighting Was Important?
« Reply #89 on: January 31, 2021, 02:18:50 PM »
I’m sure I didn’t say superhuman but they certainly followed up the sighting.

And to my question that would be a no. Neither OG nor the current German investigation thought Tasmin’s sighting was of sufficient importance to question her again. Imagine if Wolter had interviewed her....she could have placed Brueckner at 5a on the day. Imagine how much stronger his case would have been if that connection could have been made.
Sorry, but how do you know she wasn't questioned again and hasn't placed Bruckenr at 5a on the day?
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".