But in her first police statement she said she didn't see him well as it was too dark. And explain the "eggman" description which morphed into a full detailed sketch!
Wendy Murray's statement
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/10/10/new-image-suspect-be-released-madeleine-mccann-case
"I’m not buying it. I think this is more PR than anything," Murphy said. "I think this is all related to a civil suit now underway in Portugal."
Seeing I've posted from her official statements to the police, they might be credible!
SBM BBM
"She only managed to see him from the side, with the child in his arms"
That was your statement coming from jane tanner.
This is her first interview with the pj the next morning and this is her statment.
Dark skinned individual, male sex, aged between 35 40, slim physical appearance, about 1.70m tall. Very dark, thick hair, longer at the back (she could only see him from behind). He was wearing linen type cloth trousers, beige to golden in colour, a "duffy" sic type jacket (but not that thick). His shoes were dark in colour, classic type. He had a hurried walk. He was carrying a child, who was lying on both his arms, in front of his chest. By the way he was dressed, he gave her the impression that he was not a tourist, because he was very "warmly dressed".
It was a face shape maybe he turned ever so slightly so she could see his face shape.
It was a face shape maybe he turned ever so slightly so she could see his face shape.
What evidence do you want of an intruder? An intruder would have been in and out within minutes it would be doubtful that they'd be trying to leave evidence behind.
I've already provided a link where a girl was abducted from her bedroom and there was no evidence that she'd been abducted or of who had abducted her. This shows it can be done.
It amazes me that something as simple as someone walking into an apartment, picking up and child and walking off into the night is unbelievable yet we have some complete absurd stories about government conspiracy on here.
It always amazes me when there are supposed new sightings and almost immediately comes the line "Kate and Gerry McCann have dismissed this being Madeleine." If there was a supposed sighting of my abducted child I'd be holding on to every last bit of hope, not the McCanns. Why not? Unless they know she's not going to be turning up anywhere soon.
Because most likely they know more than we do. They have had access to the information first and know where it comes from and when and other information.
And who says they are saying that it is dismissed. Sounds like more spin to me.
It always amazes me when there are supposed new sightings and almost immediately comes the line "Kate and Gerry McCann have dismissed this being Madeleine." If there was a supposed sighting of my abducted child I'd be holding on to every last bit of hope, not the McCanns. Why not? Unless they know she's not going to be turning up anywhere soon.
Gerry knew.
He was already planning the Anniversary Concert (oh wait it was going to be sooner than that) with all the big names, and marketing the resulting CD "Madeleine's songs", ONE MONTH after she vanished.
:sick: