Is there a divergence of wills? Has Tannerman really been eliminated?

[Sherlock Holmes]

No I meant how do the McCanns explain the door angles if they let go of 9.15 man? That's surely why they can't. Or one reason anyway.

Oh, now I see the the question.

This is why they are hanging on to Tannerman, you mean?

PS Sorry, not sure what just happened to your original post, Lyall - a lot of cutting and pasting going on at the moment!

[AnneGuedes]

Personally I think it's semantics to suggest that the use of the word 'almost' indicates any real kind of doubt on the part of DCI Redwood and his team regarding this conclusion. There is always going to be a chance that a mistake has been made; mistakes occur all the time and in any profession. That goes without saying. But in this matter, a man has come forward to identify himself, has been interviewed by SY presumably quite extensively, matches the physical description of the person Jane Tanner saw, and has provided SY with details, unrevealed to us, which indicate to them that this is the man.

This man, who might have stepped forward earlier to the LC and was rejected, this time was found.
DCI Redwood couldn't eliminate the Tannerabductor as much as the PJ couldn't deny him without accusing Ms Tanner of lying. But, as this abductor required to believe he was hidden behind the door, I guess that DCI Redwood desperately looked for a manner to get rid of him without discrediting Ms Tanner.
In fact Ms Tanner might not have seen Innocentman at all, for some reason, but we are invited to forget about Tannerman because this faceless guy leads to nowhere.

[Lyall]

Well first of all, DCI Redwood claims that the investigation is 'almost certain' in their ruling out of Tannerman as a suspect.

Personally I think it's semantics to suggest that the use of the word 'almost' indicates any real kind of doubt on the part of DCI Redwood and his team regarding this conclusion. There is always going to be a chance that a mistake has been made; mistakes occur all the time and in any profession. That goes without saying. But in this matter, a man has come forward to identify himself, has been interviewed by SY presumably quite extensively, matches the physical description of the person Jane Tanner saw, and has provided SY with details, unrevealed to us, which indicate to them that this is the man.

How much more certain could SY be, having had the benefit of meeting the person face to face and and speaking to him at length?

This is not the kind of evidence that involves much subjectivity, conjecture,  inference , interpretation etc..on the part of investigators, or a piece of evidence such as certain forensics for example that could be inconclusive. This is a flesh and blood person who presumably believes himself to have been that person on that night. How much more evidence do you need?

And why is it so that, having ruled Tannerman out, SY needed to be seen to have a replacement? If there was no equivalent replacement why inflate one into that position?  Why not just say that inquiries are ongoing?

Why inflate 10pm man? I'm sure the lawyers could answer that one. Because without doing so Crimewatch would have been awfully thin, and that would have been bad for reputation management reasons. I think we can tell from what has been said by witnesses in Lisbon that it is the potential future impact on their children of current books and programmes that concerns them greatly, and for that reason their lawyers will have had an impact on the production of Crimewatch (because it is such a high-profile show and the audience was big).

[Estuarine]

Being a "bear of very little brain" I fail to understand what the Met with 30 plus officers (larger than entire homicide and human trafficking departments in some police forces) are doing precisely. Any offence committed against Madeleine McCann was committed in Portugal where clearly the Met have no jurisdiction. The Portuguese police carried out their own review and concluded there were grounds to reopen the case. The case has been reopened and we know not what is happening. Except that the Portuguese Police have "the power". It has been made clear by the Portuguese authorities that the current arrangement is not a joint venture with the Met. The Met are doing their own parallel thing!? whatever that may be.
Any potential offence which will come under the Met's jurisdiction will have been committed on British soil whatever that offence may or may not be......... a good feeding ground for speculation maybe.

[John]

I have renamed this thread.  The original question was who is running the investigation but the issue of tannerman is very much a part of it.

[AnneGuedes]

Could the police have done Crimewatch without mentioning 10pm man?

I know other people could have, but could the police? I think not. So how do you suddenly introduce him - and the efits - after all these years of him barely ever being mentioned (including 30 months of him never being mentioned by the Metropolitan Police themselves). I think that's the problem they faced.

I think not too. What if an Irish newspaper wondered why the only matching Madeleine child seen being carried around the alarm time had been ignored 1) by the UK media and 2) by SY ?

[Redblossom]

Lost my post so reposting


One  fact remains

SY went on Crimewatch and said Tannerman was not a person of interst/suspect/abductor and that they were looking to find smithman now

official find madeleine site still promotes Tannerman as a possible abductor and nowhere promotes smithman appeal apart from as part of a motley crew of efits with no details or differentiation as to who when and where seen and by who

official site has amended their appeal, like three months later on the have you seen these people page  just to say police think they have identified this man but its not certain

and why they are keeping victoria beckham lookalike in there .....as  a major bloody suspect LOL

Just copying an earlier post from another thread for links



*************



So SY saying Tannerman is almost certainly not the abductor has been morphed by the Mccanns into it is not possible to be certain

Website info

http://www.findmadeleine.com/campaigns/unidentified_people.html

And Met info


http://content.met.police.uk/Appeal/Madeleine-McCann-Appeal--October-2013/1400020463601/1257246741786

See near the end re Tanner sighting Under "update on previous appeal"

I also noted there is a 20 000 £ reward for info from the police

Wonder what happened to the 2.5 million reward




*********


and the ONLY place you can see smithman is here amongst all the other misfits

http://www.findmadeleine.com/


but go back to homepage and nothing on him

So yes who is running the investigation when the mccanns are asking people on their website to call in to identify Tannerman...and it will cost you. Its an 0845 number....
just as it will cost you to buy posters etc....the millions donated obviousy werent enough to fund this

[Sherlock Holmes]

Why inflate 10pm man? I'm sure the lawyers could answer that one. Because without doing so Crimewatch would have been awfully thin, and that would have been bad for reputation management reasons. I think we can tell from what has been said by witnesses in Lisbon that it is the potential future impact on their children of current books and programmes that concerns them greatly, and for that reason their lawyers will have had an impact on the production of Crimewatch (because it is such a high-profile show and the audience was big).

I understand the logic of what you are saying, Lyall, but if reputation management is the thing that explains Crimewatch, then the apparent decision by the McCanns shortly after the Crimewatch program to present a slightly different gloss on events from Scotland Yard on their website would contradict that, wouldn't it?

Presenting a united front to the public - even if they disagreed about the small print in private - would surely give the McCanns and the investigation more strength.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Being a "bear of very little brain" I fail to understand what the Met with 30 plus officers (larger than entire homicide and human trafficking departments in some police forces) are doing precisely. Any offence committed against Madeleine McCann was committed in Portugal where clearly the Met have no jurisdiction. The Portuguese police carried out their own review and concluded there were grounds to reopen the case. The case has been reopened and we know not what is happening. Except that the Portuguese Police have "the power". It has been made clear by the Portuguese authorities that the current arrangement is not a joint venture with the Met. The Met are doing their own parallel thing!? whatever that may be.
Any potential offence which will come under the Met's jurisdiction will have been committed on British soil whatever that offence may or may not be......... a good feeding ground for speculation maybe.

Interesting point, Estuarine. You're saying that the Met / SY could be working on persons in England?

[Sherlock Holmes]

This man, who might have stepped forward earlier to the LC and was rejected, this time was found.
DCI Redwood couldn't eliminate the Tannerabductor as much as the PJ couldn't deny him without accusing Ms Tanner of lying. But, as this abductor required to believe he was hidden behind the door, I guess that DCI Redwood desperately looked for a manner to get rid of him without discrediting Ms Tanner.
In fact Ms Tanner might not have seen Innocentman at all, for some reason, but we are invited to forget about Tannerman because this faceless guy leads to nowhere.

I never understood this part. Jane Tanner saw someone. That person may or may not have had anything to do with Madeleine McCann. If he wasn't carrying Madeleine, he was an innocent person carrying a different child. Tanner doesn't have to have been hallucinating...

[AnneGuedes]

I never understood this part. Jane Tanner saw someone. That person may or may not have had anything to do with Madeleine McCann. If he wasn't carrying Madeleine, he was an innocent person carrying a different child. Tanner doesn't have to have been hallucinating...

Well, she said she did and in conditions that made the AG request a reconstitution..

[Sherlock Holmes]

Well, she said she did and in conditions that made the AG request a reconstitution..

She said she saw a man carrying a child whom she assumed to be female because of the colour of the pyjamas.

She was not in any way insistant that the child was Madeleine.

Ruling 'Tannerman' out as a suspect does not cast light on her integrity. If anything it reinforces it. The man who presented himself to SY in order to be ruled out of the investigation matches her description very well.

[Estuarine]

Interesting point, Estuarine. You're saying that the Met / SY could be working on persons in England?

Guess so!
Both SY and the Portuguese Police carried out reviews at the same time. The Portuguese Police said nowt and reopened the case. SY deffed out Tannerman who the Portuguese had never believed in from day 1. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that the reviews did not deliver any NEW information and leads. They are looking again at something that was already there.

[Redblossom]

She said she saw a man carrying a child whom she assumed to be female because of the colour of the pyjamas.

She was not in any way insistant that the child was Madeleine.

Ruling 'Tannerman' out as a suspect does not cast light on her integrity. If anything it reinforces it. The man who presented himself to SY in order to be ruled out of the investigation matches her description very well

Ah but the integrity of the mccanns and their chum documentary makers (btw the same as their witness in the libel trial)re very much brought to light.ie as without integrity...when they said in their documentary tanner saw madeleine being abducted.....sad lying lot

[Mr Gray]

Guess so!
Both SY and the Portuguese Police carried out reviews at the same time. The Portuguese Police said nowt and reopened the case. SY deffed out Tannerman who the Portuguese had never believed in from day 1. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that the reviews did not deliver any NEW information and leads. They are looking again at something that was already there.

So what are these letters sent by SY to Portugal asking for co operation for a joint investigation in portugal