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

[Sherlock Holmes]

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.

So now we have a former suspect the front and back of whom could have been two different people (similar to a siamese twin only back to back instead of side-to-side? A sort of human push me - pull you*), replaced by a one-person suspect with two different heads .

 

* Perhaps this attribute addresses some of the confusion about direction of walking

[Sherlock Holmes]

I think you have one already, SH, or it was all in Latest News but that article was definitely discussed. I employed some of my best waffle on that one

Yes, I do remember the question coming up. (And I'm sure you're being modest with regard to the 'waffle', Lyall!)

To whom was that information given and why didn't they act upon it?

Was that ever worked out?

[Sherlock Holmes]

I don't see that they nearly contradict.
Had DCI Redwood been more convincing (showing Innocentman's route, indicating the time, two crucial data), you could say they "contradict".

The fact that the McCanns agreed to go along with the Crimewatch program, in which DCI Redwood presented his case, strongly suggests they accepted it at the time.

The fact that DCI Redwood was not convincing enough for some does not alter that fact.

And being 'convincing' was not his aim. His aim was to examine the facts and make a public appeal - not give the public an explanation or justification.

[AnneGuedes]

So now we have a former suspect the front and back of whom could have been two different people (similar to a siamese twin only back to back instead of side-to-side? A sort of human push me - pull you*), replaced by a one-person suspect with two different heads .

 

* Perhaps this attribute addresses some of the confusion about direction of walking

Of course ! Tannocentman was moonwalking..

[Sherlock Holmes]

When I said Tannerman had been eliminated I was jumped on from all directions and told that it was not DEFINITE that the tourist was the man JT saw and that was NOT what SY had said -  and that SY were NOT 100% certain.            If that is the case then any further information regarding this tourist could be helpful to SY to confirm or otherwise their present strong belief that he was the man JT saw.   

Seems sensible enough to me.   






   

If that were the aim, it's a pretty confused way of going about it.

To keep Tannerman in the public eye at the same time as rebranding Smithman as the abductor.

And is this how SY or other police organsations work?  Present information to the public that a person is innocent - but keep the question open slightly just in case someone comes forward? Wouldn't that make police look unsure of themselves and possibly incompetent?

[AnneGuedes]

The fact that the McCanns agreed to go along with the Crimewatch program, in which DCI Redwood presented his case, strongly suggests they accepted it at the time.

The fact that DCI Redwood was not convincing enough for some does not alter that fact.

And being 'convincing' was not his aim. His aim was to examine the facts and make a public appeal - not give the public an explanation or justification.

The McCanns had no choice. They're not the boss, though they likely wouldn't mind.
DCI Redwood had the choice to just say Tannerman had been identified and was innocent and that was all. But instead he chose (perhaps to comfort Ms Tanner) to perform a demonstration which  was ridiculous, even for people who ignored everything of the case.

[Lyall]

Yes, I do remember the question coming up. (And I'm sure you're being modest with regard to the 'waffle', Lyall!)

To whom was that information given and why didn't they act upon it?

Was that ever worked out?

I found the thread but it turns out there wasn't actually much discussion of that article >@@(*&)

Safe to say it was not ever worked out, SH.

[Lyall]

The McCanns had no choice. They're not the boss, though they likely wouldn't mind.
DCI Redwood had the choice to just say Tannerman had been identified and was innocent and that was all. But instead he chose (perhaps to comfort Ms Tanner) to perform a demonstration which  was ridiculous, even for people who ignored everything of the case.

Lawyers, Anne. After six years you couldn't just say "oh, by the way we've now identified that man" and leave it at that. It was a reputation management exercise- in this case JT's reputation. Otherwise the watching masses might be screaming at their TV's, "See, I told you: She made it up!"

They had to be very careful with the words they used in that programme.

[Sherlock Holmes]

I found the thread but it turns out there wasn't actually much discussion of that article >@@(*&)

Safe to say it was not ever worked out, SH.

Thanks for doing the homework on this, Lyall.

Perhaps this does merit a new thread then.

[Lyall]

Thanks for doing the homework on this, Lyall.

Perhaps this does merit a new thread then.

I think so

Previous brief discussion was on Page 27 of this thread
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3112.0

[AnneGuedes]

Lawyers, Anne. After six years you couldn't just say "oh, by the way we've now identified that man" and leave it at that. It was a reputation management exercise- in this case JT's reputation. Otherwise the watching masses might be screaming at their TV's, "See, I told you: She made it up!"

They had to be very careful with the words they used in that programme.

Thank you, Lyall, I'm not aware of this, we have no program of that kind in France and in Portugal.
But anyhow the masses aren't stupid enough to believe things are alike when DCI Redwood states they are. Or ?

[Lyall]

Thank you, Lyall, I'm not aware of this, we have no program of that kind in France and in Portugal.
But anyhow the masses aren't stupid enough to believe things are alike when DCI Redwood states they are. Or ?

Crimewatch was a big deal, Anne. I think somebody claimed it had the largest ever viewing figures (I can't quite believe that but that's what a paper claimed).

It's on the BBC and they had previously only ever done two programmes on the case. So the third was always going to be very important and what was said in it would have implications. People will remember that Crimewatch.

[AnneGuedes]

Crimewatch was a big deal, Anne. I think somebody claimed it had the largest ever viewing figures (I can't quite believe that but that's what a paper claimed).

It's on the BBC and they had previously only ever done two programmes on the case. So the third was always going to be very important and what was said in it would have implications. People will remember that Crimewatch.

The best audience ever : 7,3 millions (normally 5 millions). For a cold case and for the matter that was presented, not bad.

[Sherlock Holmes]

I think so

Previous brief discussion was on Page 27 of this thread
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3112.0

That's great, Lyall. Thanks so much.

[Lyall]

The best audience ever : 7,3 millions (normally 5 millions). For a cold case and for the matter that was presented, not bad.

I think that's why they had to go big on 10pm man. If they didn't those 7.3m would have been 8-)(--) Without going large on 10pm man they really had nothing did they.