Where were Jez and Gerry standing when they did their talking? Ideas solutions

[G-Unit]

Yep, and it is not verbatim, just stuff written up by someone who maybe did not have a perfect understanding of English.

It has been pointed out that the evidence was typed in English by Russell O'Brien on a laptop borrowed from Georgina the tennis coach. Look!

[slartibartfast]

Check it yourself.  Easy peasy on G Earth.

You will find that it is about 47 - 50m

So she saw him from the tapas gate?

[pathfinder73]

Check it yourself.  Easy peasy on G Earth.

You will find that it is about 47 - 50m

I'm not bothered if it's 50 metres or 30. The McCanns statements on 4 May 2007 said Jane saw the man from 50 metres away which would put her coming out of the secondary reception entrance onto the road where she said she saw the man/child crossing at the top of the road. Gerry and Jez didn't see her so she must have turned left onto the pathway.

[Alice Purjorick]

It has been pointed out that the evidence was typed in English by Russell O'Brien on a laptop borrowed from Georgina the tennis coach. Look!

Strornry, as William would have said.

[faithlilly]

Yep, and it is not verbatim, just stuff written up by someone who maybe did not have a perfect understanding of English.

What are you taking about ? The quote is from the friend's own timeline, written in ENGLISH.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm

[Robittybob1]

I'm not bothered if it's 50 metres or 30. The McCanns statements on 4 May 2007 said Jane saw the man from 50 metres away which would put her coming out of the secondary reception entrance onto the road where she said she saw the man/child crossing at the top of the road. Gerry and Jez didn't see her so she must have turned left onto the pathway.

It is really interesting for whatever impression they had was possibly a residual memory or what they recall from what from the conversations earlier that day.  But I struggle with your deduction "she must have turned left onto the pathway".

[pathfinder73]

You get two people talking by the gate and try and get somebody to walk past them on that pavement without being seen? It is impossible so the only alternative is to turn left onto the pathway.

[Robittybob1]

I still can't work it out.  You could be right others could be right, I can't decide. Frustrated and tired of it ATM.

[pathfinder73]

"At about 21.20, their friend Jane passed by the apartment (along the corridor of the main entrance) she saw an individual carrying a child."
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/VITOR_MARTINS.htm

1. Is it the corridor of the secondary reception main entrance?

2. Is it the corridor in front of the apartments main entrance i.e. car park side?

[Brietta]

You get two people talking by the gate and try and get somebody to walk past them on that pavement without being seen? It is impossible so the only alternative is to turn left onto the pathway.

Whichever side of the road they were on ... one was on the kerb ... the other was on the road.  Have a quick look at the Panorama programme again if you wish to check that out.  Not that it really matters.  The only person of any importance as far as position in the street is concerned is the witness who confirmed the presence of the two men she passed before seeing the man carrying the barefoot child at the top pf the street.

Look behind the female figure.  This is a rather good illustration of where Jes and Gerry were standing.  It also shows how wide the space was in which Jane had to pass them.

[faithlilly]

Whichever side of the road they were on ... one was on the kerb ... the other was on the road.  Have a quick look at the Panorama programme again if you wish to check that out.  Not that it really matters.  The only person of any importance as far as position in the street is concerned is the witness who confirmed the presence of the two men she passed before seeing the man carrying the barefoot child at the top pf the street.

Look behind the female figure.  This is a rather good illustration of where Jes and Gerry were standing.  It also shows how wide the space was in which Jane had to pass them.

I've seen that pavement in real life Brietta and believe me there was not enough room for Jane to pass  the two men on the same pavement. Gerry knew that and that's why he insisted that he was on the other side of the road.

This was one of the main reasons why I started doubting the McCann's story.

[Brietta]

I've seen that pavement in real life Brietta and believe me there was not enough room for Jane to pass  the two men on the same pavement. Gerry knew that and that's why he insisted that he was on the other side of the road.

This was one of the main reasons why I started doubting the McCann's story.

There were not two men on the same pavement though, and none of the three who were there ever claimed that.
For example, Jes certainly did not in his statement on 7th May. Nor did he in his rogatory statement.

In his statement of 10th May ... Gerry clearly stated he had crossed the street to speak to Jes.

In her statement of 10th May ... Jane could not remember the positioning of Gerry or Jes only that one was on the pavement and one was on the road while they were holding their conversation.

I have been of the opinion that Gerry got it wrong as to where the conversation with Jes took place but I'm not so sure now.
Jes describes being on the opposite side of the road when he saw Gerry and he crossed over to speak to him.
Gerry describes crossing over to speak with Jes.

There is nothing illogical that the man unencumbered with a child in a pushchair would cross the road to have a conversation with the man so encumbered.
Makes a lot of sense when thinking about an apparently trivial incident which meant nothing at the time and which none of the three participants were capable of detailing retrospectively chapter and verse.

[faithlilly]

There were not two men on the same pavement though, and none of the three who were there ever claimed that.
For example, Jes certainly did not in his statement on 7th May. Nor did he in his rogatory statement.

In his statement of 10th May ... Gerry clearly stated he had crossed the street to speak to Jes.

In her statement of 10th May ... Jane could not remember the positioning of Gerry or Jes only that one was on the pavement and one was on the road while they were holding their conversation.

I have been of the opinion that Gerry got it wrong as to where the conversation with Jes took place but I'm not so sure now.
Jes describes being on the opposite side of the road when he saw Gerry and he crossed over to speak to him.
Gerry describes crossing over to speak with Jes.

There is nothing illogical that the man unencumbered with a child in a pushchair would cross the road to have a conversation with the man so encumbered.
Makes a lot of sense when thinking about an apparently trivial incident which meant nothing at the time and which none of the three participants were capable of detailing retrospectively chapter and verse.

Two of the witnesses did and never changed their stance. I think that tells us all we need to know.

[pathfinder73]

Gerry was heading back to the tapas but crosses the road - the tapas isn't on that side. Jez crosses because he's going back to his apartment which is on the other side of the road. Jez crossing makes sense but the other who seems to change his mind does not. Hardly a surprise to many!

[Robittybob1]

Gerry was heading back to the tapas but crosses the road - the tapas isn't on that side. Jez crosses because he's going back to his apartment which is on the other side of the road. Jez crossing makes sense but the other who seems to change his mind does not. Hardly a surprise to many!

Why was Jez on the wrong side in the first place?