Crecheman's identity finally revealed

[misty]

I was thinking about Crecheman. Redwood said he was ‘almost certain’ that Tannerman was Crecheman. Now if Crecheman had said he saw Gerry, Wilkins or/and Tanner Redwood would have been certain he was a Tannerman. so he obviously didn’t. You with me so far?

Now are we to believe that OG are not aware of the implications of Crecheman not seeing any of the group, even though the two men were talking and sound carries at night ?

DCI Redwood said "We’re almost certain, now, that this sighting is not the abductor.", not that the sighting was an innocent father carrying his child.
Neither OG nor Dr Totman have elaborated beyond the point the Totman family thought they were the Tannerman sighting & the PJ/UK police were told this in 2007.

[G-Unit]

DCI Redwood said "We’re almost certain, now, that this sighting is not the abductor.", not that the sighting was an innocent father carrying his child.
Neither OG nor Dr Totman have elaborated beyond the point the Totman family thought they were the Tannerman sighting & the PJ/UK police were told this in 2007.

Were they?

[Brietta]

Were they?

From the OP ...

He was interviewed by the Guarda Nacional Republicana soon after Maddie, three, vanished in May 2007, but his wife Rachel said: “My husband had told the local police it could be him but we didn’t hear anything for years.

“We always thought it was Julian who was seen by Jane Tanner.

"But the national police who investigated didn’t get back to us and we don’t know if our information was ever passed on.”

[pathfinder73]

Who says he did or he didn't see them? He may have noriced people in the quiet road,  but carried on if there was no audble vehicle to watch out for. Or he just blithely carried on in the absence of any  vroom-vroom noise coming up the street.

Nothing in the report about them being seen by Totman. Faithlily is correct - if he saw them Redwood could have completely ruled him out.

Totman would have looked to his right before crossing and therefore couldn't miss them. He should be crossing at that location but to think an abductor would cross the street they checked on, in full view under street lights was always fantasyland. 

That eliminates Totman/Tannerman moving the bedroom door before Gerry's check. I've always said that the alleged door moves are key to this case.

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

[Vertigo Swirl]

Nothing in the report about them being seen by Totman. Faithfully is correct - if he saw them Redwood could have completely ruled him out.

Totman would have looked to his right before crossing and therefore couldn't miss them. He should be crossing at that location but to think an abductor would cross the street they checked on, in full view under street lights was always fantasyland. 

That eliminates Totman/Tannerman moving the bedroom door before Gerry's check. I've always said that the alleged door moves are key to this case.

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

If Totman looked doen the street in JT’s direction she would know that he had done so.  If Gerry and Jez were not there at the time she would know that he hadn’t seen them, so why lie would they lie about it?

[pathfinder73]

Does this case defy logic? I don't think so. The evidence speaks for itself. No way could Jane pass Gerry/Jez at that location. So we have 4 on the same pavement and only Jane saw anyone LOL.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Does this case defy logic? I don't think so. The evidence speaks for itself. No way could Jane pass Gerry/Jez at that location. So we have 4 on the same pavement and only Jane saw anyone LOL.

you didn’t address my point.

[pathfinder73]

I didn't need to as he would have looked right before crossing. Jane's  recollection is sketchy. "It's too long ago now."

[Robittybob1]

And Gerry (or Jez) saw her passing by?

That is their problem not her's.

[G-Unit]

From the OP ...

He was interviewed by the Guarda Nacional Republicana soon after Maddie, three, vanished in May 2007, but his wife Rachel said: “My husband had told the local police it could be him but we didn’t hear anything for years.

“We always thought it was Julian who was seen by Jane Tanner.

"But the national police who investigated didn’t get back to us and we don’t know if our information was ever passed on.”

That's the GNR, not the PJ or the UK police as was claimed. My question is why would he tell them he could be Tannerman? Who described the sighting to him? He left PdL on 12th May at the latest and the Smith's statements were made on 26th;

Jane’s description had not been released to the public before the Irish witnesses made their statements
[madeleine]

[Vertigo Swirl]

I didn't need to as he would have looked right before crossing. Jane's  recollection is sketchy. "It's too long ago now."

Her recollection the night it happened would be alot clearer and if he had looked in her direction she would have known it.

[faithlilly]

Her recollection the night it happened would be alot clearer and if he had looked in her direction she would have known it.

So we have Wilkins and Gerrybwho didn’t see Tanner and Totman who didn’t see Tanner either. A regular invisible woman.

[Vertigo Swirl]

So we have Wilkins and Gerrybwho didn’t see Tanner and Totman who didn’t see Tanner either. A regular invisible woman.

Well we know she saw him, so what are you suggesting?

[faithlilly]

Well we know she saw him, so what are you suggesting?

Or what if Totman did see Tanner, that’s why he thought the person Tanner saw was him, but wasn’t certain because he didn’t see Gerry and Wilkins as per Tanner’s sighting ? That would explain the ‘almost certain’ of Redwood too.

And the irony would be complete if the very sighting Gerry was so sure would prove his non-participation in his daughter’s disappearance was actually his undoing.

[Carana]

I was thinking about Crecheman. Redwood said he was ‘almost certain’ that Tannerman was Crecheman. Now if Crecheman had said he saw Gerry, Wilkins or/and Tanner Redwood would have been certain he was a Tannerman. so he obviously didn’t. You with me so far?

Now are we to believe that OG are not aware of the implications of Crecheman not seeing any of the group, even though the two men were talking and sound carries at night ?

I'd hope that the Met officer asked him, but this was years later. He may have vaguely noticed people around or simply couldn't remember if he had or hadn't. Unless something unusual had happened that drew his attention, I don't see why it would register.