Author Topic: Wandering Off Topic  (Read 3154437 times)

0 Members and 96 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline misty

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5430 on: May 20, 2019, 12:40:17 AM »
He said almost certain. What did you take that to mean ?

He said SY were almost certain the sighting was not the abductor. He didn't say anything about it not being an accomplice.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5431 on: May 20, 2019, 01:09:46 AM »
He said SY were almost certain the sighting was not the abductor. He didn't say anything about it not being an accomplice.

Redwood said that they had identified the man they thought was the sighting and that the man himself also thought it could be him. Where in that do you find room for the suggestion that he was an accomplice ?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline misty

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5432 on: May 20, 2019, 01:16:45 AM »
Redwood said that they had identified the man they thought was the sighting and that the man himself also thought it could be him. Where in that do you find room for the suggestion that he was an accomplice ?

Can you provide Redwood's quote in which he confirms SY had identified the Tanner sighting?

Offline G-Unit

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5433 on: May 20, 2019, 07:00:02 AM »
He said SY were almost certain the sighting was not the abductor. He didn't say anything about it not being an accomplice.

I know how wedded some were to the Tanner sighting, but that's pretty desperate imo.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline pathfinder73

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5434 on: May 20, 2019, 01:54:15 PM »
Can you provide Redwood's quote in which he confirms SY had identified the Tanner sighting?

Didn't  you watch CW in October 2013 - when they ruled out Tannerman and their focus shifted to Smithman? They showed photos of the father aka Tannerman.
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Offline sadie

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5435 on: May 20, 2019, 06:26:41 PM »
Didn't  you watch CW in October 2013 - when they ruled out Tannerman and their focus shifted to Smithman? They showed photos of the father aka Tannerman.
1)  Directions
All the exits from 5A were to the west of the fathers flat.   

Tannerman was coming from the west, the correct direction for anyone leaving 5A ...   But the father and little girl were coming from OC evening creche, directly in the east

Tannerman coming from the opposite direction to the anonymous father.   How does that equate to the situation ?


2)  Different times too, IIRC


https://youtu.be/OZ8jmdWlB8Y   

The two images seemed to be of different types of men.
i)  Tannerman athletic and casual, youthful looking, fairly long striding (especially in some of the earlier images.)  And slicked back, close to the head, straightish hair

ii)  The father looking like a professional on holiday; rather stiff and too upright altogether … can you imagine any father with child carrying experienced father carrying his daughter any distance at all, as Jane Tanner witnessed her little girl being carried?   With the child across his chest and over both sets of arms?  Altogether too exhausting for anyone but Charles Atlas and the father was hardly a Charles Atlas type and probably wouldn't want to be either ! This father  had a head full of  soft wavy hair.


Very different types and the directions are wrong .

The times too

Sorry, but I think that CI Redwood got this one wrong.   I don't think that the father was Janes Tannerman

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5436 on: May 20, 2019, 06:35:35 PM »


Jane Tanner is clearly satisfied she never witnessed an abduction.
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5437 on: May 20, 2019, 06:42:55 PM »

Jane Tanner is clearly satisfied she never witnessed an abduction.
How did you come to that fact?  Cite please or logical reasoning please.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline The General

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5438 on: May 20, 2019, 06:43:12 PM »
Just the mode of carrying alone is hard to believe, given the build up of lactic acid in the biceps and shoulders after about a minute.
It's as if she's thought 'what's the most uncomfortable, unnatural way I can carry a child?'
I actually witnessed a young father carrying his sleeping child like this while on the tube the other day. He had his hands clasped under the child, but with arms out, as if carrying a log, but with forearms close to the body. It's the only way to relieve the pain I imagine. He didn't last long, he slung the child over his shoulder - then got off at Old Street.
Subject Matter Expert - Hobos.

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5439 on: May 20, 2019, 06:47:51 PM »
How did you come to that fact?  Cite please or logical reasoning please.

She was quick to talk to the press previously, not a peep from her since.

If she felt SY were mistaken she would have said something by now.

But she hasn't said a word, ergo, she is quite satisfied she never witnessed an abduction, & she knows best

Simples.
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5440 on: May 20, 2019, 06:59:50 PM »
She was quick to talk to the press previously, not a peep from her since.

If she felt SY were mistaken she would have said something by now.

But she hasn't said a word, ergo, she is quite satisfied she never witnessed an abduction, & she knows best

Simples.
@)(++(*
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5441 on: May 20, 2019, 07:05:56 PM »
Just the mode of carrying alone is hard to believe, given the build up of lactic acid in the biceps and shoulders after about a minute.
It's as if she's thought 'what's the most uncomfortable, unnatural way I can carry a child?'
I actually witnessed a young father carrying his sleeping child like this while on the tube the other day. He had his hands clasped under the child, but with arms out, as if carrying a log, but with forearms close to the body. It's the only way to relieve the pain I imagine. He didn't last long, he slung the child over his shoulder - then got off at Old Street.

Key point.

Even at the distance that Tannerman was away from 5A when Jane saw him, the small of his back must have been creaking.

What's up, old man?

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5442 on: May 20, 2019, 07:09:01 PM »
Christian Brueckner Fan Club

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5443 on: May 20, 2019, 07:10:03 PM »
Hilarious I'm sure.
Yes, the logic, or lack of it on display in your post did have me chortling, thanks!
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #5444 on: May 20, 2019, 07:10:49 PM »
She was quick to talk to the press previously, not a peep from her since.

If she felt SY were mistaken she would have said something by now.

But she hasn't said a word, ergo, she is quite satisfied she never witnessed an abduction, & she knows best

Simples.
Have you got an cite showing where Jane Tanner talked to the press?

"If she felt SY were mistaken she would have said something by now"  Logically incorrect IMO.

Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.