Gerry and Jez chat while Jane walks by. Seconds later she spots Tannerman!

[pathfinder73]

I don't recognise the scene in the photograph.

If you are interested in a picture of how the scene actually looks at night I refer you to Heri's blog where he explains it all succinctly.


http://espacioexterior.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/the-madeleine-mccann-abduction-janosch.html

  No thanks. Can you see the light now?

[sadie]

Well if we work on information contained within statements we have three adults, two male and one female and a baby in a buggy occupying at max a 40m² area any time between 20:45 and 21:15. About 15 to 20 metres further up the road was another male adult moving west to east, carrying a child. The adult carrying the child did not give a statement to which we are party. Of the others:
Two of the adults (one m one f) say they were all on the west side of the street one (m) says the two male adults were on the east of the street.
The two male adults saw neither the one carrying the child nor the female passing by.
The female adult says she passed by the two male adults with the baby not speaking to them and then saw the male adult with the child crossing the road at the junction ahead of her. She says he was moving west to east.
So what really happened? Any takers?
How long it took the female to traverse any distance and whether her footwear was haute qualite by Philippe Ferlop or knock offs from Solly down Romford market is of not much relevance.

Jane is very clear.


JANE TANNER


According to Jane Tanner THEY were in the road, or at the very least Jez was in the road and presumably the pushchair was in the road with him..


Jane Tanner's rogatory interview, which took place on 08 April 2008, sourced from Duarte Levy
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id222.html

Jane Tanner - Record Of Tape Recorded Interview IV

...snip....   “He wasn’t there at that point, no, no.  So, erm, then I walked, so I just walked out the, erm, the Ocean Club bit and walked, sort of walked up the road.  And then Gerry was there, he was talking to Jez WILKINS in the road, well they were sort of, as I went by.  So I think I thought then ‘Oh that’s why Jez’, not Jez, ‘That’s why Gerry has been, you know, that’s why he’s longer than we thought’”.

Gerry was talking to Jez Wilkins IN the road. 
Does that mean just Jez was in the road or were both of them in the road?  it sounds as tho both of them were in theroad, but we dont know for sure.   But we do know that Jez was definitely in the road and possibly Gerry.  We know that Gerry had his back to the wall, the curved part at the alleyway entrance according to 3 different pieces of evidence.   
According to the Carpenters there were vehicles parked along there.  So with them IN the road were the cars/vans blocking their sighting of Jane ?  That in addition to periferal vision being so very limited would account very well for Jez not seeing Jane if they were looking at his little boy in the pushchair..  Gerry had his back to Jane anyhow, so would not have seen her.

To remind you Pf, the pavement is a good 2 metres wide at that point.  No problem passing them.  Bags of space.

[sadie]

No thanks. Can you see the light now?

Why are you deliberately putting out this misinformation?  It has been worked out on this forum using three soundc sources that Gerry was mistaken and that the chat took place across the road , but partially in the road and on the corner of the allleyway.

I think that shot is taken from a video filmed after the new brighter lighting, with little doubt extra lighting as is usually the case when filming... so is false information.

[sadie]

'From what I remember, the conversation happened right there on the pathway '

Jez Wilkins rogatory statement.

You are remembering wrongly.   In Jezes Rogatory statement, as far as I can find, there is no mention of the pathway.

Jezes Rog

Eventually, I left one road to the other side of the street to the pool complex, between the McCann apartment and the Tapas Bar. In order to visualise this street, I believe it was the street most used by the news agencies and journalists as all the parked cars indicated during the coverage period.
When I left the street, I remember seeing Gerry on the other side of the same. I believe that there was some speculation in the press regarding the circumstances of this encounter. I remember that I crossed the street to talk to Gerry. According to what I remember, Gerry was walking when I spotted him.

[sadie]

They must have asked crecheman if he saw them before crossing. You would take a look to the right when crossing the road carrying a child. It's Elementary My Dear Watson!

Yep, and they were over 30 metres (100 Feet away on the opposite side of the road, and NOT directly opposite the rather weak street lamp.)  He himself, Tannerman, was almost under a lamp as he crossed the street

Try measuring and using a little more logic Pf, then you will find the truth.

And we will all be happy for you.

[sadie]

They couldn't see the side gate unless you look over the balcony.

I am doubtful that they (the Fenns) could see the side gate because there is a jutting out tiled roof  which would prevent them seeing it unless they leaned out in a way that Mrs Fenn would not be capable of, and even with a tyounger person, I am doubtful.

[sadie]

There would not have been sufficient room on the pavement to do that. Gerry was stood with his back to the gate, not sideways on.

There would have been room.  That pavement is a good 2 metres deep.  However it seems that from the Carpenter statements there was a line up of parked cars along that kerb certainly in the direction of the Tapas Reception.  They were probably casual about standing in the road cos normally that road is completely empty of moving traffic for 10 minutes on end, at that time of the year.    And they were also protected by the parked cars.


WARNING !
DO NOT USE GOOGLE EARTH map dated 2/2/2015 to check.  It has been deliberately corrupted by falsifying the widths of the pavements, reducing them from 2+ metres width to about 1 metre width.  Zoom right in and you will see the clumsy lines drawn in.
Use map dated to 6/22/2007 [until that is corrupted too !]  Screenshots Taken of both.

ETA.  Part of the difference is because the image is shot from very slightly an angle rather than from directly above, but that doesn't account for the pavements being so much reduced in width 

Use map  dated 6/22/2007

To change the date of your GE map

1)  See the band across the top of the image.  Go to about the 6th box from the left , a clock.  Click on that
2)  A slider will come down
3)  Very carefully slide it across until you get the date 6/22/2007.  It is tricky to get the exact date, be patient .
4)  As you slide across the image regresses, until it is as it was on the desired date

Very clever.

[Lyall]

Those satellites are ours Sadie %£&)**#

[sadie]

Those satellites are ours Sadie %£&)**#

I never said whose they were, but someone has altered them.  Why?

[Lyall]

I never said whose they were, but someone has altered them.  Why?

I don't know I've never used Google Earth, so can't explain any anomalies.

[sadie]

I don't know I've never used Google Earth, so can't explain any anomalies.

Fair enough.  It isn't your fault .... I dont think .... &%+((£

Only joking, I doubt that you have done it 


Take care Lyall

Nigh Night 

[Lyall]

Definitely not guilty.

Goodnight Sadie

[colombosstogey]

and so the point is....errrrr what is the point?

SY have dismissed the Jane Tanner sighting, and it seems also the discrepancy between who saw what and when lol.....as of no importance....to SY that is. So why labour on about it.

We know jane tanner saw someone and its been proven as we said all along it was a creche man.

So the sighting is bogus of no importance...so noting new then....to talk about?

[Alfred R Jones]

and so the point is....errrrr what is the point?

SY have dismissed the Jane Tanner sighting, and it seems also the discrepancy between who saw what and when lol.....as of no importance....to SY that is. So why labour on about it.

We know jane tanner saw someone and its been proven as we said all along it was a creche man.

So the sighting is bogus of no importance...so noting new then....to talk about?

You'd have thought so wouldn't you...?

[Mr Gray]

perhaps the statements and times were not accurate...perhaps they were poorly translated....

the investigation has moved on, it's about time others caught up