New Sketch of Maddie Abductor

[gord]

The funniest thing? Really?
Well everything about this case just saddens me.
And it always comes back to them leaving the children alone :banghead: even though everyone is in agreement on this point.

Why do I get the feeling it's used as an excuse. .....Probably because its the only thing we know they did wrong.

It doesn't follow that they killed Madeleine.

If you really need an answer...3. Yours. I don't have a problem with that.
Many people have made terrible mistakes and paid the ultimate price. Many of them may even have been the perfect parent to this point.

In the last few days I heard about a mother, in the US, who left her three young children watching a movie while she showered. Sadly her two year old managed to get out of the house and drown in the family pool. I believe this family is being supported in their tragedy.
My heart goes out to her too as it doesn't follow that she's a bad mom. I really don't know to judge her. She may have done this many times before without a problem and thought her children were safe too.

We like to think we wouldn't make a mistake with our children. I was very careful with mine and would only use family to babysit. But I still think there but for the grace of god. Tragedy could strike any of us in many different ways no matter how careful. And we would be left broken and forever saying...If only.

Thats why unless I see real evidence, not just rumours and smears, I won't attack them.

:clap: :clap:

excellent post

 

[gord]

the thing about this sketch and the release of it in the press

Sure it could be that the police know all about this man and have nterviewed him - great if they have .........they certainly havent told anyone else about it I understand they have secrecy laws , but surely getting some public feedback , letting the general public know something about the case as it develops - it would help them , it would help reduce the constant rumour mill and gossip

Most big murder enquiries of this nature depend on the public to help crack the case

I am constantly surprised as well at the almost fervent attacks on anything that comes out that doesnt fall into the Mccaans did it theory .

Noone here ( including me ) can categorally say what happened that night on the 3rd May . Both theories are hard to explain - but Maddy is missing. Note said missing - because until a body is found or we have irrefutable evidence to the contrary she is missing .

The sketch did give a number of giggles with all the remarks that it looks like Charles Bronson/George Harrisson etc etc ......... all very hilarious I am sure , if it wasnt the fact that a 3 year girl was involved I might have a laugh too .

Even if there was a 1% chance that this might drag some memory maybe spark something then it was worth doing . sure it might all be pointless , but until someone PROVES otherwise then I am glad that there is still something happening . You all might thing Metado 3 are thieves , in it for themeselves , but if Maddy is still out there somwhere ( I agree very slim chance ) then at least they are asking some questions which seems to be more than the police are doing .

 

[martin walkerdine]

this photo of the person who might have took madeleine mccann in my opinion doesn't look like robert murat one bit and that jane tanner and co are just spinning this to make the mccanns look innocent no wonder they had a secret meeting in november in leicestershire about this case as it just now a propaganda exercise in making money and spinning lies against others people who are just pawns in a campaign / witch hunted.

 

[ThoughtFox]

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1301452,00.html

You will note that Jane Tanner has "confirmed" the likeness.

WHAT??? Now she SAW his face?? She really needs to stop now, she is scaring me...

Going back to the first post, you are right, colomom. Jane consistantly said she didn't see this guy's face at all, and they left it out of the drawing done in October.

If people want to see the original drawing, and read about the way Jane has changed her story, here are the links:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id30.html

http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2007/12/jane-tanner-incongruences.html

 

[gord]

again we get the age old problem whenever we discuss anything here - what can we genuinely take as fact from blogs / other sites and the press.

As I believe tanner has only given one major interview in public - for the Panorama documentary , and her original police report in May . I think she might have also issued a joint statement with the others .

to argue about the minutae of detail is pointless whatever we believe in as we cant prove anything from our desks .

WhenI saw her being interviewed on TCV she looked calm and believable - I didnt think she was lying - if she was she very good.

I just cant see why she would lie ? why would she hamper a murder investigation by lying ..........unless she had a hand in the muder

I just can see the motive for it ..........put your whole life at risk to cover up what ??

Even if the police dont believe her , they have to look at every posibility and as far as I know the person who was seen by Tanner carrying what looked like a child has never come forward and as far as I know has never been traced .

The News of the World report you quoted above says that Tanner has confirmed the likeness , that is not the same as saying it the same man it is saying that maybe the hair was the same length or the build was the same .....again we dont know , we dont know if Tannereven spoke to the NOTW as believe me as papers go the NOTW is one of the worst culprits for making things up

anyway thoughtfox we will have to in this case agree to disagree .

 

[Rino]

Why do I get the feeling it's used as an excuse. .....Probably because its the only thing we know they did wrong.




In the last few days I heard about a mother, in the US, who left her three young children watching a movie while she showered. Sadly her two year old managed to get out of the house and drown in the family pool. I believe this family is being supported in their tragedy.
My heart goes out to her too as it doesn't follow that she's a bad mom. I really don't know to judge her. She may have done this many times before without a problem and thought her children were safe too.

Apples and oranges

 

[Claycat]

again we get the age old problem whenever we discuss anything here - what can we genuinely take as fact from blogs / other sites and the press.

As I believe tanner has only given one major interview in public - for the Panorama documentary , and her original police report in May . I think she might have also issued a joint statement with the others .

to argue about the minutae of detail is pointless whatever we believe in as we cant prove anything from our desks .

WhenI saw her being interviewed on TCV she looked calm and believable - I didnt think she was lying - if she was she very good.

I just cant see why she would lie ? why would she hamper a murder investigation by lying ..........unless she had a hand in the muder

I just can see the motive for it ..........put your whole life at risk to cover up what ??

Even if the police dont believe her , they have to look at every posibility and as far as I know the person who was seen by Tanner carrying what looked like a child has never come forward and as far as I know has never been traced .

The News of the World report you quoted above says that Tanner has confirmed the likeness , that is not the same as saying it the same man it is saying that maybe the hair was the same length or the build was the same .....again we dont know , we dont know if Tannereven spoke to the NOTW as believe me as papers go the NOTW is one of the worst culprits for making things up

anyway thoughtfox we will have to in this case agree to disagree .

A voice of reason!

 

[april4sky]

Apples and oranges

You think

 

[Rino]

As I believe tanner has only given one major interview in public - for the Panorama documentary , and her original police report in May . I think she might have also issued a joint statement with the others .

to argue about the minutae of detail is pointless whatever we believe in as we cant prove anything from our desks .

What you beleieve does not mesh with the actual evidence you put forth here. It would be a lot easier to follow your logic if your logic followed a path. Her one interview+a police statement+a possible joint statement contradicts eachother but you use it to bolster your beleifs.

What you call minute details are documented differences in her statements that you call unreliable if others take it at face value

 

[iNTERESTEDWOMAN]

Here is a new article about the sketch.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/20/nmaddy320.xml

I think the last two paragraphs in the article sums it all up nicely...once again it appears to be a play on words, (or a spin as some would call it):

We are launching this manhunt with one person in mind," he said.

"It is for Madeleine and for Madeleine's sake. This man has to be traced." Mr and Mrs McCann, from Rothley in Leicestershire, remain formal suspects or arguidos in the case.

Funny how he says it for one person, then we are reminded The McCanns remain suspects. So who is this man hunt for? Madeline? or Kate or Jerry the suspects?. 3 people are mentioned, not one.

 

[gord]

What you beleieve does not mesh with the actual evidence you put forth here. It would be a lot easier to follow your logic if your logic followed a path. Her one interview+a police statement+a possible joint statement contradicts eachother but you use it to bolster your beleifs.

What you call minute details are documented differences in her statements that you call unreliable if others take it at face value

I disaggree totally

have you seen her detailed police report - no neither have I . so how we can comment on it as fact

Most of the quotes that I see here - that you call her statements are 3rd party quotes from papers like the NOTW or dubious blooging sites like the Mccaan files - and yes I do consider these sites unreliable

I have seen so many " quotes " from tanner that it seems she must be constantly being intevniewed . - which she hasnt

ONE major interview with the BBC ONE . The poor woman has been dragged through the mud being called a liar , mad , to the more extreme saying she had a hand in the murder or she was abusing the other kids

 

[iNTERESTEDWOMAN]

I disaggree totally

have you seen her detailed police report - no neither have I . so how we can comment on it as fact

Most of the quotes that I see here - that you call her statements are 3rd party quotes from papers like the NOTW or dubious blooging sites like the Mccaan files - and yes I do consider these sites unreliable

I have seen so many " quotes " from tanner that it seems she must be constantly being intevniewed . - which she hasnt

ONE major interview with the BBC ONE . The poor woman has been dragged through the mud being called a liar , mad , to the more extreme saying she had a hand in the murder or she was abusing the other kids

Yes, Poor, POOR Jane. I feel so sorry for her that she had to be late to the Tapas Party. Those darn sick children! At 9:10 she decided her toddler was well enough to be left alone, and headed to the bar when she saw the "morphman without a face" who apparently had an invisible force field, (since he was able to casually/quickly/run/walk past by 2 grown men while allegedly carrying one of their own children, and yet they never saw him).

20 minutes later her toddler (that was well enough to be left alone...ya know) was found puking all over her bed by her father, who was able to walk 100 yards to their apartment, clean up the child, change the sheets, comfort the child, get her back to sleep AND change shirts, walk back 100 yards all within 20 minutes so that he could join his mate at the party.

Jane being the Poor, loving person she is, decided she should stay at the party...because...well heck, how much vomit can a child hold anyway?? The timing was incredible, with all the vomit cleaning, the late comers, the checking parents, the visitors...they just ALL happened to be seated at the table the precise minute Kate sounded the alarm....

Poor Jane.

But, of course, this time line was only reported in about 4 major newspapers, and we don't know if any of it is true, and we don't really know if Jane has a child, or if she was even at the bar because if it didn't come out of her mouth than it can not possibly be true, because everybody lies except Jane.

 

[iNTERESTEDWOMAN]

I have one more thing to say about Poor Jane, then I'll leave the poor woman alone. First a personal story:

Several years ago we went to my 20 year class reunion. Grandma was to come to the house to babysit. Well, Grandma WAS LATE...very late! I was going nuts. I wanted to be at the party where I knew all my old friends were. By the time Grandma got here the reunion was well into full swing, and we had missed about half of the party. I don't remember seeing anyone on the way there, all I could focus on was getting there and fast, (and telling my husband to drive faster)...LOL

Jane, caring for a sick child, (but still planning on leaving her alone) was late to the party. She knew everyone was having fun, and she was missing out. How long do you think it took her to get there? Did she stroll leisurely, taking note of every person, and the clothing they where waring, or did she bolt to get there not to miss out on the fun?

 

[colomom]

Thanks to the best researcher on the net, RINGO, over at the Proboards79 forum!!
Copied from: http://helpmadeleine.proboards79.co...eral&action=display&thread=1200926355&page=19 post #214

Has Jane Tanner Been Inconsistent?


Sky News, 25th May 2007

Portuguese police have released the description of a suspect thought to have been seen carrying a child on the night Madeleine McCann disappeared......Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa, of the Policia Judiciaria, said the suspect was possibly carrying a child or an object that might have appeared to have been a child.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91210-1267576,00.html


Fox News, 25th May 2007

Chief investigating police officer Olegario Sousa said at a news conference that police are looking for a white man, between the ages of 35 and 40, who was wearing a dark jacket and beige trousers and who was possibly carrying a little girl on May 3, the date Madeleine disappeared. "The man was carrying a child or an object that could have been taken as a child" Sousa told journalists. He also said the man was 5 foot, 10 inches tall.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275519,00.html


The Times, May 27th 2007

A family friend of Gerry and Kate McCann has told police she saw a blonde-haired girl being carried away from an Algarve holiday apartment wrapped in a blanket at the time Madeleine is believed to have been snatched from her room.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article1847879.ece


Daily Mail, 28th May 2007

The woman who saw Madeleine McCann being carried off in the arms of a mystery man is wracked with guilt that she did nothing to stop him. A close friend of Kate and Gerry McCann, she saw a young blonde girl wearing "distinguishable" pyjamas and wrapped in a blanket.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=458036&in_page_id=1770


The Telegraph, 12th September 2007

9:15pm Jane Tanner told police that at this time she went to check on her daughter, who was ill, and recalled seeing Mr McCann talking to Mr Wilkins. As she went into the apartment, she saw a man aged around 35 carrying a little girl wrapped in a blanket. She thought nothing of it but is now convinced this was the kidnapper. The child's pyjamas matched the description of those Madeleine was wearing. Mr Wilkins apparently saw no such man, and does not remember seeing Miss Tanner. He has told police: "It was a very narrow path and I think it would have been almost impossible for anyone to walk by without me noticing."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/11/wmaddy311.xml


The Daily Mail, 26th October 2007

Miss Tanner, 36, was one of the group of friends on holiday with the McCanns - the Tapas Nine - and told police she saw a man carrying a bundle away from the apartment and down towards the church in Praia da Luz, at about 9.15pm.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...in_article_id=489762&in_page_id=1766&ito=1490


News.com (au), 27th November 2007

She was was one of the group of friends on holiday with the McCanns and told police she saw a man carrying a bundle away from the apartment and down towards the church in Praia da Luz, at about 9.15pm.

http://tinyurl.com/2zd3lq

 

[colomom]

http://tinyurl.com/2n9qup

Snippet
Madeleine witness: I wish I'd seen abductor's face
Last updated at 15:08pm on 28th October 2007

Comments Comments (2)
The key witness in the hunt for Madeleine McCann has admitted she would not recognize the man she says abducted the four-year-old, it was claimed today.

Jane Tanner, a close friend of Gerry and Kate McCann, is certain she saw a man carrying Madeleine from her holiday apartment in Praia da Luz 45 minutes before her mother raise the alarm at 10pm.

But a friend of Ms Tanner - a member of the so called "Tapas Nine" who dined with the youngster's parents the night she vanished - has revealed the witness now fears she would not recognize the suspect again. . . ."

And yet....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=509639&in_page_id=1770

"Jane Tanner, who told police she saw a man carrying a child away from the McCanns' apartment, said she was "80 per cent sure" he was the one depicted in the artist's impression."

 

[colomom]

And of course....The Evolution of Bundleman

 

[ThoughtFox]

Brilliant, colomom! :clap: :clap: :clap:

You did the work for the rest of us since links don't seem to be enough - thank you! :blowkiss:

Gord: I'm sorry to keep causing "age-old troubles" but you seem to be under the impression that Jane Tanner is being misquoted or something.

She is on the record saying that she wished she could have seen the man's face. On Panorama she talks about the hair, but she couldn't have seen his face as he was walking away.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DbjXaKHMRas

I'm not making that up for my own amusement, and the bloggers I quoted had links to the media right there on the pages.

I don't understand it, and I certainly don't why she's lying and changing her story. But it is a fact.

When the new drawing came out, Jane "identified it" as the same man. Going back to the first post here with colomom's good question - did she see the face or not? What is the truth - that's all I care about.

I think she has tripped herself up.

Also, the woman with the "new" information is flying to Portugal today, not to meet with police, but with Metodo so they can "search" for this man. No British police had anything to say about her, and neither did the police in Portugal. That says alot - this whole article and spin comes from the McCann Team, and isn't officially part of the investigation.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/u...itness-flies-back-to-portugal-86908-20295037/

I suggest they look in the phone directory under "Mr. Red Herring." :crazy:

Also, isn't it illegal for them to look for this guy in Portugal? Haven't we been told that time and again? I think this poor woman is going to have a very short visit in Luz.

 

[iNTERESTEDWOMAN]

Brilliant, colomom! :clap: :clap: :clap: ...snip...

Also, isn't it illegal for them to look for this guy in Portugal? Haven't we been told that time and again? I think this poor woman is going to have a very short visit in Luz.

I shortened your post to save room Foxy...

Interesting She's going to Portugal...April4sky reported on the General discussion #19 that PLE will not allow any searching from team McCann.

originally posted by April4sky
The McCanns are not paying Clarence Mitchell. His salary is being paid by Brian Kennedy a Liverpool business man.

They are paying professionals to search outside Portugal for Madeleine. The PLE will not allow them to send searchers into Portugal

 

[Texana]

Brilliant, colomom! :clap: :clap: :clap:

You did the work for the rest of us since links don't seem to be enough - thank you! :blowkiss:

Gord: I'm sorry to keep causing "age-old troubles" but you seem to be under the impression that Jane Tanner is being misquoted or something.

She is on the record saying that she wished she could have seen the man's face. On Panorama she talks about the hair, but she couldn't have seen his face as he was walking away.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DbjXaKHMRas

I'm not making that up for my own amusement, and the bloggers I quoted had links to the media right there on the pages.

I don't understand it, and I certainly don't why she's lying and changing her story. But it is a fact.

When the new drawing came out, Jane "identified it" as the same man. Going back to the first post here with colomom's good question - did she see the face or not? What is the truth - that's all I care about.

I think she has tripped herself up.

Also, the woman with the "new" information is flying to Portugal today, not to meet with police, but with Metodo so they can "search" for this man. No British police had anything to say about her, and neither did the police in Portugal. That says alot - this whole article and spin comes from the McCann Team, and isn't officially part of the investigation.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/u...itness-flies-back-to-portugal-86908-20295037/

I suggest they look in the phone directory under "Mr. Red Herring." :crazy:
.

\
Thank you, ThoughtFox, you said it very well!

Let's see if I can summarize this issue with Jane changing/not changing her story:

Jane changed her testimony, as evidenced not only by the numerous news reports, but the sketches themselves.

As to the veracity of the news reports that she "confirmed" the appearance, if she did not actually do that, she should be make a press release even now that she did not or cannot do that, whatever. She is not.

Ergo, we can conclude that there is a reasonable chance the reports that she "confirmed" the appearance of the latest sketch. Not only that, her story changed as to whether he carried something wrapped in a blanket that might be a child, that definitely was a child, to being able to identify Madeleine's pajamas.

Jane's testimony has changed substantially and if she were cross-examined, it would be shredded like carrots in a Cuisinart.

Why she changed her story--good intentions, mistaken after-the-fact thoughts, downright intentional revisions--who knows.

We can debate why her story has changed, but debate that it has changed is just not worthy of our time, frankly.

 

[Texana]

I also believe (or think) this! That is why he might be open to the idea of snatching a child for a price. Just a thought! Just an idea! Not a fact!

I worked in a homeless shelter when I was finishing my teacher certification. I can tell you that while you or I might think of that as a way to get money, they would not.

Homeless people are not long-term thinkers who can create a plan such as taking a child for ransom. If they were long-term thinkers, they wouldn't be homeless. That's one of the striking things about them. It is what differentiates them from you or me.

They have been known to sexually assault children or other people, but the child is usually let go immediately. (Again, that lack of long-term thinking, "this kid could identify me.") Just not there.)

If they do kill, (rarely, they are much more likely to be beaten or killed themselves) it is usually in combination with a schizophrenic condition, and more of a sudden random act--pushing someone onto the train tracks or shooting them at the grocery store, for example. They don't hide the body because again, the ability to plan or reason is lacking.

The odds are if Madeleine was abducted, the kidnapper looked far more normal and blended in completely with the crowd. Particularly if the "pedophila ring" that was frequently mentioned as likely suspects was involved. Organized crime participants make it a point to blend, not stand out, in any kind of public place. Ditto for the intelligent serial abductor acting alone.