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

[Lyall]

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?

If we're not sure about Jane Tanner's testimony, why are the door angles in tablets of stone? As you say, the doors and the bundleman scenario kind of go together.

Regarding Bundleman's face, it was not seen by Jane, because by the time she focussed on him properly - after having noted that he was carrying a child in a strange way- he was well across the road walking away from her, with his back to her. Hence the focus on the long hair at the back. She would not have seen the hair at the back if she had been looking at the face.

Maybe but it's impossible for her to ID that man now if she never even saw his face then, six years ago. That was my point.

"why are the door angles in tablets of stone?"

I expect they're not, but they were in Crimewatch. Hence the continuing need for a way to explain them (someone must have been in the apartment, before 10pm man).

[Luz]

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.

Finally are you getting there?
This is what some of us have been telling ourselves for the last 7 years.
The way the McCann invade (pervade) and attempt to twist around the official police investigations has been astonishing since day one.
It's incomprehensible if in fact they are/were trying to find their daughter. For me the only explanation is that from the beginning they did everything to avoid the investigation to get to the truth.

[John]

That whole scenario is a mystery all right.

I'm actually with Sadie on this point, namely that Jane, as a woman alone walking in the dark, would be hyperconscious of activiy around her - particularly male activity. Gerry and Jeremy however were engrossed in conversation and perhaps simply didn't notice her.

And as I mentioned earlier, if Gerry had been adamant about Jane's reports being correct regarding the timing and sighting of bundleman, and therefore her sighting of Gerry and Jeremy, which she says went together - and he's adamant about quite a few things is our Gerry - he would not have eliminated himself unnecessarily from the scenario at the risk of casting doubt on Jane's testimony. The testimony that formed the backbone of the abduction claim.

Given that Gerry is at odds with Jane and Jez as to even which side of the road they were on whilst chatting can we believe anything?

[John]

This is basic and enough.
Tannerman had the unique function to support the abduction from bed and Jane saying she saw at the same moment the abductor and Gerry was giving Gerry a golden alibi.
DCI Redwood destroyed two precious facts.
The official site attempts to insinuate doubts.

Good observation Anne.  Redwood has indeed destroyed the only evidence of abduction and Gerry's alibi in one fell swoop!  Apologies for the idiom.

[Benice]

Finally are you getting there?
This is what some of us have been telling ourselves for the last 7 years.
The way the McCann invade (pervade) and attempt to twist around the official police investigations has been astonishing since day one.
It's incomprehensible if in fact they are/were trying to find their daughter. For me the only explanation is that from the beginning they did everything to avoid the investigation to get to the truth.

So why did they spend so much time and effort trying to get the the case re-investigated?

Hardly the sane actions of a 9 guilty people - who apparently have got clean away with a terrible crime against a child is it?

The whole idea is preposterous IMO - unless one is prepared to toss all semblance of common sense and logic out of the window first - or unless one is a '[ censored word ]' of the highest order.

[Benice]

Given that Gerry is at odds with Jane and Jez as to even which side of the road they were on whilst chatting can we believe anything?

IMO yes.  We can believe that everything the experts tell us about how  'memory' works is absolutely correct.

[Estuarine]

I think we should be clear about the discussion we are having here then

Scotland Yard do not believe Jane Tanner saw Madeleine McCann being  'abducted' 

Why are we assuming that the McCanns disagree with that conclusion  ?  (  a conclusion arrived at after three years,  and seven million pounds of tax payers money spent  )

The pink site suddenly put forward the theory that the front and back of Tannerman could be two different people. So although SY deffed out the front end the back end could yet have currency. Oh joy! So we still have a stone yet to be turned over for which we may reasonably request funds.

[John]

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.

Why is that Eleanor?    Why is SY being so cagey about this character, a man who stayed in the shadows for over 6 years? 

If it had been me that night I would be shouting it from the rooftops but not this person.  I have a feeling all is not as some would like it to appear.  I am sympathetic to the McCanns on this issue, I am not convinced Tannerman was Innocentman at all.

[Cariad]

The pink site suddenly put forward the theory that the front and back of Tannerman could be two different people. So although SY deffed out the front end the back end could yet have currency. Oh joy! So we still have a stone yet to be turned over for which we may reasonably request funds.

Also, does this imply that teh Mccanns are conducting their own investigation still, running along side that of SY and the PJ?

Are there now three concurrent investigations in to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?

[Eleanor]

So why did they spend so much time and effort trying to get the the case re-investigated?

Hardly the sane actions of a 9 guilty people - who apparently have got clean away with a terrible crime against a child is it?

The whole idea is preposterous IMO - unless one is prepared to toss all semblance of common sense and logic out of the window first - or unless one is a '[ censored word ]' of the highest order.

No.  Just a deluded patriot who is prepared to defend The PJ at all cost to reason, even when some of them are clearly corrupt.

[Lyall]

Why is that Eleanor?    Why is SY being so cagey about this character, a man who stayed in the shadows for over 6 years? 

If it had been me that night I would be shouting it from the rooftops but not this person.  I have a feeling all is not as some would like it to appear.  I am sympathetic to the McCanns on this issue, I am not convinced Tannerman was Innocentman at all.

I think once you consider the secret activities of lawyers in recent years you can understand more. I'm sure we only see the tip of the communication iceberg.

All is definitely not as it appears, and it's the private involvement of lawyers behind the public face of this investigation that explains a lot I think.

[Serendipity]

Given that Gerry is at odds with Jane and Jez as to even which side of the road they were on whilst chatting can we believe anything?

Remember too that Mrs Susan Moyes who had the apartment above Mrs Fenn's was on her balcony enjoying a glass of wine at 9.15 on 3rd May and she did not mention seeing or hearing GW, GM, JT or anyone carring a child despite having one of the best views in the area  Here is her radio interview:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/stoke/radiostoke/click_of_the_day/archive/2007/jul_sep.shtml

Will play through RealPlayer

[Eleanor]

Why is that Eleanor?    Why is SY being so cagey about this character, a man who stayed in the shadows for over 6 years? 

If it had been me that night I would be shouting it from the rooftops but not this person.  I have a feeling all is not as some would like it to appear.  I am sympathetic to the McCanns on this issue, I am not convinced Tannerman was Innocentman at all.

I don't know, John.  I an still trying to figure it out.  Why did he have to be tracked down?  Why didn't he just come forward nearly seven years ago?  He could have done this anonymously.  And he certainly must have known.

I am reluctant to go down the road of Scotland Yard pulling a blinder, but so far they have offered no real evidence that it was actually he.

I suppose that it might have been something to do with the times of the numerous cell phone calls, but that won't mean all that much.  We are only talking about half an hour.
So for the moment I am sticking with Tanner Man.

[AnneGuedes]

Hardly the sane actions of a 9 guilty people

And if they were 2 ?

[stephen25000]

So why did they spend so much time and effort trying to get the the case re-investigated?

Hardly the sane actions of a 9 guilty people - who apparently have got clean away with a terrible crime against a child is it?

The whole idea is preposterous IMO - unless one is prepared to toss all semblance of common sense and logic out of the window first - or unless one is a '[ censored word ]' of the highest order.

Who said all nine ?

Meanwhile covering up the truth to protect the careers would be a reason for some.