The tracker dogs

[Redblossom]

thank you Icab, cant spell the rest until I look at it intently
 
and Anne

It seems no trail of an abducted Madeleine was found then? In the context of the Jane Tanner or the Smith direction.

How do you explain this ?

means to me, if the dogs are correct, neither sighting was of Madeleine

Possibly. But what about the laws of probability ?

I dont know what you are asking Anne

[AnneGuedes]

bug !

[AnneGuedes]

thank you Icab, cant spell the rest until I look at it intently
 
and Anne

It seems no trail of an abducted Madeleine was found then? In the context of the Jane Tanner or the Smith direction.

How do you explain this ?

means to me, if the dogs are correct, neither sighting was of Madeleine

Possibly. But what about the laws of probability ?

I dont know what you are asking Anne

Not asking, just wondering whether probability laws "allow" two carriers (if none of them was carrying Madeleine, then there's no doubt they're different persons) neglecting to step forward saying "I was on that street at that time bringing my daughter back home".

[Redblossom]

thank you Icab, cant spell the rest until I look at it intently
 
and Anne

It seems no trail of an abducted Madeleine was found then? In the context of the Jane Tanner or the Smith direction.

How do you explain this ?

means to me, if the dogs are correct, neither sighting was of Madeleine

Possibly. But what about the laws of probability ?

I dont know what you are asking Anne

Not asking, just wondering whether probability laws "allow" two carriers (if none of them was carrying Madeleine, then there's no doubt they're different persons) neglecting to step forward saying "I was on that street at that time bringing my daughter back home".

Who knows, maybe they didnt want to be involved, it happens, maybe one or both are the type that dont watch  tv much, not as if these sightings were on tv 24/7/365

[AnneGuedes]

thank you Icab, cant spell the rest until I look at it intently
 
and Anne

It seems no trail of an abducted Madeleine was found then? In the context of the Jane Tanner or the Smith direction.

How do you explain this ?

means to me, if the dogs are correct, neither sighting was of Madeleine

Possibly. But what about the laws of probability ?

I dont know what you are asking Anne

Not asking, just wondering whether probability laws "allow" two carriers (if none of them was carrying Madeleine, then there's no doubt they're different persons) neglecting to step forward saying "I was on that street at that time bringing my daughter back home".

Who knows, maybe they didnt want to be involved, it happens, maybe one or both are the type that dont watch  tv much, not as if these sightings were on tv 24/7/365

May be they were both deaf. Or one was deaf and the other pretended his lover or his wife that he was in Abu Dhabi with his daughter or the deaf one was not deaf at all but an Ossetian speaking only Digor.
Who knows ?

[Carana]

It does seem odd that an innocent person wouldn't come forward.

However, I suppose there could be a few plausible reasons:

- An illegal immigrant with a family to care for?
- Someone with a dodgy past (burglar / drug dealer / reckless driver, etc.) carrying his own daughter?
- Someone who since got sent to jail?
- Someone who assumed they'd got their man when RT was made arguido?
- Someone who only realised quite some time later that he was a person of interest (JT's bundleman wasn't published for some time and there never was a sketch of Smith-man) and doesn't realise the importance of closing that line of enquiry?

[AnneGuedes]

May be.
But they were two carriers... and you can't dismiss probability laws.

[peter claridge]

Just the one carrier as seen by the Smith family.  Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.

[AnneGuedes]

Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.

There's no evidence of this.

[peter claridge]

Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.

There's no evidence of this.

Jane Tanner's sighting is pure fabrication to provide Gerry McCann with an alibi for the Smith sighting, an event that McCann would have prefered not to have been known... yes that's correct, a truly independant sighting of their daughter's claimed abduction that for some reason has never been part of one of their staged briefings for the press.

[ferryman]

Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.

There's no evidence of this.

You're right, Anne, there isn't.  Even the Mcannpjfiles (when it was known as just mccannfiles) at one time had a separate section stressing that the canard that JT never left the table all evening is an inference based on absence of information rather than information.

That is to say that no one in the files remarked on Jane's whereabouts at any given time.

There's no earthly reason why anyone should.

[peter claridge]

Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.

There's no evidence of this.

You're right, Anne, there isn't.  Even the Mcannpjfiles (when it was known as just mccannfiles) at one time had a separate section stressing that the canard that JT never left the table all evening is an inference based on absence of information rather than information.

That is to say that no one in the files remarked on Jane's whereabouts at any given time.

There's no earthly reason why anyone should.

Jes Wilkins states that she didn't pass by during his meeting with Gerry.  Russell O'Brien, Jane Tanner's partner and the writer of the first two timelines fails to highlight the claimed second visit of Tanner to their apartment.

[Lace]

Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.

There's no evidence of this.

Jane Tanner's sighting is pure fabrication to provide Gerry McCann with an alibi for the Smith sighting, an event that McCann would have prefered not to have been known... yes that's correct, a truly independant sighting of their daughter's claimed abduction that for some reason has never been part of one of their staged briefings for the press.

@Peter

So,  let us think about this. 

Gerry McCann goes to the apartment,   checks the children,  makes his way back to the TB.    He meets with Jez Wilkings and chats for a while [Jez Wilkins confirms this]      THEN,   Gerry goes back to the apartment takes Madeleines body and hides it somewhere.   

He then goes back to the Tapas Bar, in time for Kate to give the alarm [a waiter see's Gerry searching for Madeleine]

That really takes some doing!!




How would Gerry know where to hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it.

Why did the Tapas friends say that Kate McCann when arriving back at the Tapas Bar to raise the alarm said 'She's gone Gerry'    It doesn't say in any of the Tapas friends statements that anyone said 'where's Gerry'

SO,   Gerry must have made a visit back to the TB to inform the other's of Madeleine's fate and the fact that he was going to hide her body,  for them to say in their statements that Gerry was at the TB when Kate give the alarm.

To say that all the Tapas friends would agree with this is just too utterly stupid to contemplate.

[ferryman]

Jane Tanner sat at the table until the pretend alarm was raised by Kate.

There's no evidence of this.

You're right, Anne, there isn't.  Even the Mcannpjfiles (when it was known as just mccannfiles) at one time had a separate section stressing that the canard that JT never left the table all evening is an inference based on absence of information rather than information.

That is to say that no one in the files remarked on Jane's whereabouts at any given time.

There's no earthly reason why anyone should.

Jes Wilkins states that he didn't pass by during his meeting with Gerry.  Russell O'Brien, Jane Tanner's partner and the writer of the first two timelines fails to highlight the claimed second visit of Tanner to their apartment.

No he doesn't.  He says that he doesn't remember seeing her, which is quite different:

The conversation lasted for approximately three to five minutes. We spoke of the care of children and how they were getting along. He told me something like 'he was on night duty'. I explained to him that I was returning to the apartment as my son was now sleeping. I assumed that Gerry was off to dine with the group in the Tapas bar, but I cannot precisely say this came from him or if I figured this out from our previous conversations regarding the checking system for the children. I remember that Gerry told me if he had stayed another week, he would likely do as I was doing and would stay with the children one night. It appeared as though he was jealous of what I was doing, but given that he was with a big group, he felt the obligation to meet with them every night, and the chosen location was the Tapas bar. I believe that there was some sort of agreement with the tapas Bar as they appeared to have a reservation every night and it was impossible for other guests to book at spot there.
I do not know if we were face to face or side to side when this conversation occurred. As I had the pram with me I was rocking it so my son could sleep, it seems to me that I was in the downward direction, but it is possible that I was in the opposite direction.
I do not remember having seen anyone else at this time besides Gerry. After leaving each other, Gerry walked downward in the direction of the Tapas Bar and I began to walk in the other direction, up the pathway. I turned left at the crossing and passed the apartment. I did not meet anyone else during my walk and once in my apartment, I did not venture out again.

Q. Relative to whether I know Jane Tanner;
Now I know her name, description of the clothes and photos which I have seen in the press. At that time I knew of her as a member of the group but did not know her name. I do not remember having seen her when I spoke with Gerry,

[AnneGuedes]

hide Madeleine's body so that noone not even the sniffer dogs could find it.

Lace, sniffer dogs are repelled by cadaver scent.