Crecheman's identity finally revealed

[faithlilly]

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.

Didn’t he give a statement years before ? If he saw Tanner that would 3xplain why he thought Tanner’s sighting was him.

[Vertigo Swirl]

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.

But it hasn’t proven to be his undoing has it?  The Met decided JT’s sighting was of Totman years ago and as far as I’m aware Gerry continues to live the life of a free man.

[barrier]

IMO this crecheman malarkey can be seen in two ways,either Tanner saw Totman and didn't get a clear enough view to recognise him,or it wasn't him.
If it wasn't him then have SY made a huge booboo,remember Redwood said that they had identified the person as being there at the exact same area and in the same time,thus enabling them (SY) to move the timeline on,just suppose as it seems some would like to suggest that there was some one else in the exact same area at the same time then SY have wasted years and £millions in missing him/her by moving onto to Smithman and then the supposed burglars.

[Brietta]

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]

Perhaps the GNR asked him if he had seen either Jane, Gerry, Jes or a lookalike at the top pf the road as he carried his daughter home?

Bridget O'Donnell describes a visit from the police the following day ~ perhaps Dr Totman who I believe was resident in the same block was interviewed at this time in the same manner Bridget describes. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann

[Brietta]

IMO this crecheman malarkey can be seen in two ways,either Tanner saw Totman and didn't get a clear enough view to recognise him,or it wasn't him.
If it wasn't him then have SY made a huge booboo,remember Redwood said that they had identified the person as being there at the exact same area and in the same time,thus enabling them (SY) to move the timeline on,just suppose as it seems some would like to suggest that there was some one else in the exact same area at the same time then SY have wasted years and £millions in missing him/her by moving onto to Smithman and then the supposed burglars.

I don't think serious investigators would have ignored either the burglaries (particularly the two in block 5) or the assaults on children without at least attempting to find some clarification.
I think any investigation which ignored accounts of men carrying a child at that time would have been remiss.  It is worth bearing in mind that nothing happened as far as the Smith sighting for example was concerned throughout the months between it being reported and Mr Smith mistaken identification.

In my opinion if Dr Totman was not identified until Operation Grange identified him, that was not a failing on the part of OG but a failing on the part of the original investigation.

I truly don't get where this idea comes from that police doing their job of tracing criminals ... because in my opinion that is undoubtedly what they are doing ... and hopefully bringing wrongdoers to justice, are somehow 'wasting years' and 'wasting money' in so doing.

Maybe we should save the lot and just disband all the forces of law and order and leave the criminals free rein to get on with it?  Isn't that the logical conclusion?

[barrier]

I don't think serious investigators would have ignored either the burglaries (particularly the two in block 5) or the assaults on children without at least attempting to find some clarification.
I think any investigation which ignored accounts of men carrying a child at that time would have been remiss.  It is worth bearing in mind that nothing happened as far as the Smith sighting for example was concerned throughout the months between it being reported and Mr Smith mistaken identification.

In my opinion if Dr Totman was not identified until Operation Grange identified him, that was not a failing on the part of OG but a failing on the part of the original investigation.

I truly don't get where this idea comes from that police doing their job of tracing criminals ... because in my opinion that is undoubtedly what they are doing ... and hopefully bringing wrongdoers to justice, are somehow 'wasting years' and 'wasting money' in so doing.

Maybe we should save the lot and just disband all the forces of law and order and leave the criminals free rein to get on with it?  Isn't that the logical conclusion?

There were not reports  of two different men walking around the exact same area at the  same time,Redwood clearly is of an opinion and Totman is Tannerman and according to his wife  he (Totman) was the one seen by Tanner,therefore those that wish to suggest there was some one else are the ones calling into question the investigation by SY.The first investigation dealt with it,according to the article on which this thread is based Mr Totman  was  questioned soon after Madeleine was reported missing.
It is those that cannot accept that Tanner never saw an alleged abductor are the ones with an issue with SY.
I agree that the police should be left to get on with it which they have done,elimnating  Tannerman,eliminating the alleged burglars,elimniating Smithman,not much left is there?

[Robittybob1]

Mr Totman come forward and say something please.

[Brietta]

There were not reports  of two different men walking around the exact same area at the  same time,Redwood clearly is of an opinion and Totman is Tannerman and according to his wife  he (Totman) was the one seen by Tanner,therefore those that wish to suggest there was some one else are the ones calling into question the investigation by SY.The first investigation dealt with it,according to the article on which this thread is based Mr Totman  was  questioned soon after Madeleine was reported missing.
It is those that cannot accept that Tanner never saw an alleged abductor are the ones with an issue with SY.
I agree that the police should be left to get on with it which they have done,elimnating  Tannerman,eliminating the alleged burglars,elimniating Smithman,not much left is there?

In my opinion all that is left is to find out what happened to Madeleine McCann ... and in my opinion that is precisely what they are working on.

As far as Dr Totman is concerned, I celebrate the fact that he exists and thus exonerates the hideously maligned Jane Tanner from all the rubbish written about her.

In my opinion though there is absolutely no certainty that he is the child carrier witnessed by Jane Tanner ... and bearing in mind the word "almost" I'm not entirely alone in that.

[Brietta]

Mr Totman come forward and say something please.

Even if he wanted to I doubt he could without prejudicing the active investigation into Madeleine's case ~ not to mention breaking Portuguese law, maybe a concern if he intends to enjoy holidaying there in the future?

[Robittybob1]

Even if he wanted to I doubt he could without prejudicing the active investigation into Madeleine's case ~ not to mention breaking Portuguese law, maybe a concern if he intends to enjoy holidaying there in the future?

What it was OK for his wife to say something but not him?

[Brietta]

What it was OK for his wife to say something but not him?

Maybe she's not too keen on Portuguese holidays?

But there is no evidence at all that she would throw a spanner into the works of an active investigation into the case of a missing child.

[faithlilly]

But it hasn’t proven to be his undoing has it?  The Met decided JT’s sighting was of Totman years ago and as far as I’m aware Gerry continues to live the life of a free man.

He does indeed.

[Eleanor]

Any further Libellous Comments and I will be awarding Warning Points.

[Robittybob1]

Maybe she's not too keen on Portuguese holidays?

But there is no evidence at all that she would throw a spanner into the works of an active investigation into the case of a missing child.

We are just wanting to know what he would have told the GNR anyway.

[Vertigo Swirl]

He does indeed.

So, despite your claim that Gerry is to be undone by claiming he was on one side of the road instead of the other, that really doesn't look likely after all, does it?