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

[AnneGuedes]

She would not have seen the hair at the back if she had been looking at the face.

She noticed the type, colour and height of his shoes though..
Usually, what you first look at is the face, isn't it ? Or is Ms Tanner a shoe maniac ?

[AnneGuedes]

I am still not sure if I understand the significance of the door angles. There was nothing to record those angles ( a camera in other words) so how can we be sure that the reports are accurate?

Mr McCann mainly gave an extreme importance to those angles. 
The fact is admirable : just because of the door angle, Mr McCann and then Mrs McCann bothered to have a look at their children, the first to be proud and the second to be horrified.

[Sherlock Holmes]

She noticed the type, colour and height of his shoes though..
Usually, what you first look at is the face, isn't it ? Or is Ms Tanner a shoe maniac ?

Well perhaps she is.

I think the reason she didn't record the face is that, as Tannerman was walking across the road from the left hand side to the right, from the angle Jane viewed him, and she was on the left hand side of the road, he was therefore walking away from her, as it were. She therefore only would have had a very minimal glimpse of part of his face before he continued across the road.

Now if he had been walking from the right hand side of the road across to the left (Jane's side) he would have been facing her for most of his journey, and presumably she would have had more to say about the face.

I would like to be able to say that perhaps Jane was wrong about the direction. This would take care of the problem of the location of Innocentman's creche in relation to apartment 5A.

But Jane's description, which focuses on the side and back of him, indicates otherwise.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Mr McCann mainly gave an extreme importance to those angles. 
The fact is admirable : just because of the door angle, Mr McCann and then Mrs McCann bothered to have a look at their children, the first to be proud and the second to be horrified.

They did give an importance.

But we still don't have an accurate measure of those angles, or of the exact times that they were noted.

[Sherlock Holmes]

@ Anne

And also with regard to Jane Tanner's description of bundleman, let's imagine as a thought experiment that he had been walking right to left across the road (in other words, from the Creche side to apartment 5A).

Jane would be likely to have seen his face much better, and the whole of the front of the body in general. She may have mentioned the colour of a shirt or t-shirt; described a neckline; noted a belt.

Moreover, the famous legs would have been a-dangle from his left arm rather than his right, and the head of the child would have been facing Jane Tanner. She may therefore have noted hair colour or have been able to give a definitive answer as to whether it was a boy or a girl - sans the need for relying on the colour or design of those infamous pyjamas.

Yet if we consider Jane's descriptions, none of these things are mentioned. Her description of bundleman is entirely consistent with him having been walking from left to right across the top of the road.

Therefore her omission of the face from her description makes perfect sense.

[Eleanor]

I am still not sure about this.  The direction from which he was coming just doesn't add up, unless he got lost.

I have no idea why Scotland Yard and the McCanns appear to differ.  We don't have enough details about what this man was supposedly doing.  And nothing definite has actually been said by Scotland Yard or The McCanns.

[colombosstogey]

I think this is a incredibly important question at the moment and I'm surprised it isn't getting more media attention.

The McCanns are making it very clear that they themselves now have very different ideas about the investigation than Scotland Yard. They are going as far as to contradict Scotland Yard, in fact.

They nonetheless agreed to participate in Crimewatch which promoted a reconstruction that, as far as we can gather, reflects Scotland Yard's understanding of events.

Millions of taxpayers money is being poured into SY headquarters, yet after many years of campaigning and fundraising, of pulling strings in government in order to get a formal UK investigation going, the McCanns are taking public steps that show their complete ambivalece to Scotland Yard's work.

It is absolutely astonishing.

THIS IS EXACTLY WHY AMARAL GOT THE BOOT....

Because he was not bowing to their ideas of the ABDUCTION BY PEDOPHILE, and he criticised the british police by saying they were bowing to every whim of the McCanns, now SY are getting the same treatment. Perhaps now they will understand why the child was never found.

The McCanns are interfering far too much in the investigation.

NOW this will promote MORE crap coming in for the police to deal with.

I mean honestly, what are the chances of TWO men walking the same with a child at the same time, one with the back and one with the front.

Jeez they need to leave things alone and let the police do their job.

DONT they realise they and their media circus is probably one of the reasons why the child disappeared without a trace in the first place.

I wonder if SY have seen this?

I dont expect they will be very happy.

[Mr Gray]

Quite simply Tannerman cannot be 100% ruled out. neither can Victoria or spotty man..therefore must syill promote them...wouldnt want to be accused of supressing the photo fits

[Eleanor]

Why should The McCanns not have slightly different ideas?  They aren't exactly shouting about it, and neither are Scotland Yard.  In fact, nothing definite has been said by either of them.  So why should not both options still be open?

So far nothing has been said to explain the difference in direction from the creche.  And we are only talking of approximately half an hour.  So until I know why that man was coming from the wrong direction I am unlikely to take it as gospel.

[stephen25000]

Quite simply Tannerman cannot be 100% ruled out. neither can Victoria or spotty man..therefore must syill promote them...wouldnt want to be accused of supressing the photo fits

Neither can the accidental death of Madeleine in the apartment.

Try not to forget davel.

[stephen25000]

We must also remember of course, the Mccanns are great detectives as well.

[Mr Gray]

Neither can the accidental death of Madeleine in the apartment.

Try not to forget davel.

 I think it can really...for lots and lots of reasons

[stephen25000]

I think it can really...for lots and lots of reasons

Of course you do.

[John]

I also find it significant that the McCanns appear to be diverting focus away from the only person or line of inquiry that Scotland Yard have put forward to the public, through Crimewatch and other official channels.

Other ideas/ persons of interest etc. have been  ' we are not giving a running commentary'.

The McCanns have every right to see certain things differently from SY and to pursue certain matters as they personally see fit, but to contradict, or nearly contradict, SY's main official thrust, is something quite different.

Could this be the start of a new phase, maybe a turning point?

[John]

It wasn't only the legs. It was a man, a strange method of carrying, a time, a place... all these must have been corroborated by the suspect police have now ruled out.

Otherwise, what would make them think it was the same person?

Why is it only now, some 6 years later, that this innocent tourist has been identified?  Where has he been for 6 years...Mars?