Wandering Off Topic

[Holly Goodhead]

From 9:27 on the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atfDV7imHHY Jane Tanner knows exactly where she was and what she saw and makes that perfectly clear.
There is absolutely no suggestion that she turned left to walk up the path she is adamant she continued to walk towards the car park entrance to block 5.

Are you able to upload the cctv? 

[Brietta]

Are you able to upload the cctv?

I have no idea how long it will remain:  the programme seems to be systematically in the process of being deleted

[Holly Goodhead]

I have no idea how long it will remain:  the programme seems to be systematically in the process of being deleted

Thanks.  Given you are so sure of what JT did or didn't do I thought you had cctv footage but I understand now you're working off a reconstruction.  This reconstruction in terms of precise positions of JT, GM and JW is as good as useless since JW did not avail himself of the opportunity to partake probably on the basis his recollection does not accord with GM's.  As DE said there will always be inconsistencies. 

[Holly Goodhead]

We sort of know that, but Amaral must think Jane is confused somewhat.  What I find is that OK if Jane turned off into the alley way that becomes and even longer way to get to her front door.  At no time when walking the alley way will Jane see Tannerman cross her field of vision from the left to the right.

That's not the way I see it.  If JT turned left upon leaving OC reception she would have in her line of sight 'Tannerman' crossing the road at the T junction and GM/JW chatting outside the small gate of 5A.  If she then turned left into the alley to access her apartment 5D, GM/JW would not necessarily see her since there would be no need for her to pass them. 

[jassi]

That's not the way I see it.  If JT turned left upon leaving OC reception she would have in her line of sight 'Tannerman' crossing the road at the T junction and GM/JW chatting outside the small gate of 5A.  If she then turned left into the alley to access her apartment 5D, GM/JW would not necessarily see her since there would be no need for her to pass them.

But that's not the way she told it.
If she was untruthful about that, why should anything she said be believed ?

[Brietta]

Thanks.  Given you are so sure of what JT did or didn't do I thought you had cctv footage but I understand now you're working off a reconstruction.  This reconstruction in terms of precise positions of JT, GM and JW is as good as useless since JW did not avail himself of the opportunity to partake probably on the basis his recollection does not accord with GM's.  As DE said there will always be inconsistencies.

I see where you are coming from now.  I did not mention cctv in my post probably for the simple reason there was none in that location.  What was there in the link I provided was the material witness who knew exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it ... it is your privilege to gainsay what she said to camera.
She became rather used to sceptics calling her unwavering evidence into question over the years until the invisible Dr Totman put in an appearance and made them look rather silly.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

[Robittybob1]

That's not the way I see it.  If JT turned left upon leaving OC reception she would have in her line of sight 'Tannerman' crossing the road at the T junction and GM/JW chatting outside the small gate of 5A.  If she then turned left into the alley to access her apartment 5D, GM/JW would not necessarily see her since there would be no need for her to pass them.

OK so Tannerman is still seen at the "T" junction walking in the direction she said, but only seen from a distance of 50 meters or so, not the 5 meters she says in one interview.

[G-Unit]

I see where you are coming from now.  I did not mention cctv in my post probably for the simple reason there was none in that location.  What was there in the link I provided was the material witness who knew exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it ... it is your privilege to gainsay what she said to camera.
She became rather used to sceptics calling her unwavering evidence into question over the years until the invisible Dr Totman put in an appearance and made them look rather silly.
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

I saw a "material witness who knew exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it" being contradicted on camera and told she didn't see what she said she saw.

If it was Dr Totman Redwood found then it was Redwood who looked silly because 'Totman' wasn't coming from the direction of the night creche according to Jane Tanner.

[ShiningInLuz]

I saw a "material witness who knew exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it" being contradicted on camera and told she didn't see what she said she saw.

If it was Dr Totman Redwood found then it was Redwood who looked silly because 'Totman' wasn't coming from the direction of the night creche according to Jane Tanner.

If the night creche ran until 11.30pm, then technically he could have been putting his daughter into it, before nipping off for a beer or three.

Two problems with this.  Totman's movements are a poor fit with either coming from or going to the creche.  It can be done, but it is not a logical route.  And from memory, there was a second Totman child.  If correct, Mrs Totman should have been in tow.

[Anthro]

Shining in Luz, is the shorter route to the night creche past 5A, then left through the car park (opposite OC entrance) of Block 6?

[Anthro]

Totman - short route to night creche?

[attachment deleted by admin]

[ShiningInLuz]

Shining in Luz, is the shorter route to the night creche past 5A, then left through the car park (opposite OC entrance) of Block 6?

Yes, though that car park is not for block 6.

[Holly Goodhead]

I saw a "material witness who knew exactly what she saw and exactly where  and when she saw it" being contradicted on camera and told she didn't see what she said she saw.

If it was Dr Totman Redwood found then it was Redwood who looked silly because 'Totman' wasn't coming from the direction of the night creche according to Jane Tanner.

But the mind can play tricks if you will.  JT observes a man carrying a child at a time she has no reason to think there's anything sinister about him.  She then learns of MM's disappearance and her mind races ahead 'OMG I saw a man walking away from block 5 with a child in his arms'.  I'm not saying this is what happened.  All I'm saying is that its a possibility.  People react differently upon receiving new info.  Had MM not disappeared those who produced efits would in all probability have never given those observed a second thought.  But upon learning of MM's disappearance everything takes on a new meaning.  We know all the efits, Tannerman and Smithman, none of whom look remotely similar, cannot all have been involved in MM's disappearance. 

[Holly Goodhead]

Totman - short route to night creche?

What does the yellow line represent?

[Anthro]

Yellow line is the short route from Tapas bar to night creche. I have added the red line to indicate what the short route would be given Totman’s position when Tanner saw him at the top of the road.