groundhog day

[Clutchbag]

patsy, desperate measures, OR scotland yard have their measure and are playing a chinese torture game withthem for their lies, hahah

 

[SapphireSteel]

I watched that documentary, "madeleine was here" it just made my skin crawl.

There was soooo much wrong with it.

I'm thrilled they did it though. From the first scene when Kate says "to be honest" I thought...that means some of what you say isn't honest, Kate?

:waitasec:

 

[Donjeta]

The problem is, IMO, if the man Jane Tanner saw looked like this:

and this:

and this:

I can't help thinking she doesn't have a clue what the man she saw looked like.
Maybe he was wearing a disguise, in case he could be anybody at all.

 

[gord]

how about this picture ?


at the end of teh day the guy is dead and who knows but if you are doing a cold case review - for goodness sake this gut was a known child offender and in the vicinity

And as far as I know JT has alwasy said that she didt see the face or have a clear view - all her staements have been fairly consistent on this

 

[Clutchbag]

how about this picture ? View attachment 28169


at the end of teh day the guy is dead and who knows but if you are doing a cold case review - for goodness sake this gut was a known child offender and in the vicinity

And as far as I know JT has alwasy said that she didt see the face or have a clear view - all her staements have been fairly consistent on this

gerry mccann said that tanner said the pic of the man with the large teeth is 80 per cent a likeness to the man she saw
:waitasec:

as for that sketch with the man with his hands in pockets, yes errily similar to a pic of hewlett twenty years plus previously

:waitasec:

 

[Donjeta]

how about this picture ? View attachment 28169


at the end of teh day the guy is dead and who knows but if you are doing a cold case review - for goodness sake this gut was a known child offender and in the vicinity

And as far as I know JT has alwasy said that she didt see the face or have a clear view - all her staements have been fairly consistent on this

I just don't understand how she came up with the sketch of the face that she did not see. :waitasec:

 

[SapphireSteel]

Lol me neither.

It is absolutely clear that her sighting changed with the wind.

Let us not forget she identified the "abductor" as Robert Murat, originally.

:cow:

 

[Clutchbag]

I just don't understand how she came up with the sketch of the face that she did not see. :waitasec:

Those two sketches with the phone numbers on the bottom you posted on the previous page were not sketches done with Jane Tanner, but with the witness Gail Cooper, they are of the charity collector who went round her house and scared her.

She was the one who changed her story a few times and whose accounts of what she saw when and where were all over the shop. These sketches were done by the same artist btw who did the one with Jane Tanner of the man carrying a child.

BUT Jane Tanner, well according to Gerry Mccann and Clarence Mitchell, at a presentation they gave in early 2008, Said that goofy creepy longhaired scruffy charity collector man bore a striking 80% resemblance to the man she saw, this does not add up or ring true as she never saw a face. Dogs dinner again.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Jane Tanners original statement said that the only thing she saw with any clarity was the child. She gave no detailed description of the "abductor" at all as she didn't see him...she only saw the pajamas.

From the statement of one of the first respondents on the scene -

Nelson Filipe Pacheco da Costa (GNR Patrol) - Praia da Luz, 03 May 2007

'After the search of the interior, his colleague went to check the area around the apartments and the Tapas Bar, while the witness remained next to the apartment, just outside it. At that moment a female individual, he did not know whether she was a member of the group of friends, who was in the neighbouring apartment, said that she saw an individual carrying a child, running, and that because of the pyjamas she was wearing it could have been Madeleine. It was in these circumstances that abduction began to be talked about. He made a report about this situation and sent it to the police.

This sighting did not seem to him to be very credible, because when he asked her about the physical characteristics of the individual, she said it was very dark, however she saw the pyjamas clearly.'

- 3rd witness statement from the PJ files, 17 October 2007 (note: 2nd witness statement was based around Robert Murat)

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

:cow:

 

[SapphireSteel]

I just don't understand how she came up with the sketch of the face that she did not see. :waitasec:

Or how she managed to identify Robert Murat, later?

Then change her mind and description yet again, after that..?

The brain cannot record what it cannot see.

You could hypnotise her all you like but if her eyes didn't actually record anything, there is no memory to "recover".

:banghead:

 

[gord]

I just don't understand how she came up with the sketch of the face that she did not see. :waitasec:

in her statement to the Leceister polioce she said many times that she was uneasy about doing a sketch interview as she only had a fleeting side view of the persons face and it only became important in hindsight

The PJ didnt have the side view face recognition soft ware so she did her best with the expert sketch artist

I have no idea if Hewit is involved - but I will say one thing about the two is that there is not a million miles apart - I mean the length of the hair etc etc - but who knows

I keep on coming back to the point that this guy was a known convicted child offender / who was in the area - I hope the original investigation did a thorough job on his alibi back in 2007

But if there is some strands of a lead that need to be looked at by tye cold case team - why is everyone getting upset about it ??

 

[gord]

Those two sketches with the phone numbers on the bottom you posted on the previous page were not sketches done with Jane Tanner, but with the witness Gail Cooper, they are of the charity collector who went round her house and scared her.

She was the one who changed her story a few times and whose accounts of what she saw when and where were all over the shop. These sketches were done by the same artist btw who did the one with Jane Tanner of the man carrying a child.

BUT Jane Tanner, well according to Gerry Mccann and Clarence Mitchell, at a presentation they gave in early 2008, Said that goofy creepy longhaired scruffy charity collector man bore a striking 80% resemblance to the man she saw, this does not add up or ring true as she never saw a face. Dogs dinner again.

so lets look at this :

we have Another seperate witness Gail Cooper who gives a decription that fits Howlett

Tanner whilst not giving an accurate facial description - gives something a description that could fit Howlett - the hair the build etc

Howlett was a known offender with a dreadfull record of child abuse dating back years - I wont post any details of his crimes as some are just awful

He was in the vicinty at the time

Now all this does not make a guilty verdict by a long shot - and evidence would be needed - and as the guy is dead he might have taken it to his grave but surely to goodness this is a trail that any cold case investigation must follow - who did this guy know as offenders like him do tend to asocciate with other offenders - who were his known associates - were they interviewed ?- you go through every inch of statements and look again

you dont just dismiss it - it might be a confusing scenarion - but it need looked at by fresh pair of eyes - maybe that is what the review team have done . ??

 

[fabgod]

The odd things about the RH situation for me are,
Jane Tanners statements, never mention a ponytail and specifically mention thick hair longer at the back, she states the man as being 35 -40 a similar age to herself therefore not an age that she would presumalby be guessing at, but RH would have been around 57 to 60 at that point depending on which report you believe (17 to 22 years difference)

From the photos available. RH hair was not very dark and thick, but at best brown/greying and receding quite noticably.

The PJ looked into him and discounted him, the UK police apparently interviewed him about Lesley Molseed and another unconnected case but not Madeleine McCann, why?
It was common knowledge due to the press coverage of the interest made public by Clarence Mitchell so why the public lack of interest from UK police forces that actually interviewed RH?

The Metropolitan police have declined to comment on RH so where is the apparent information coming from, we are told that Operation Grange is not giving a running commentary so how is is that the Daily Mirror are aware of the investigations?
With regard to the Lesley Molseed story, he was definitely linked to the case by witnesses, yet never convicted, there are no stories of him having talked about her in the press, yet we are to believe he couldnt wait to talk to people about Madeleine McCann? it just doesnt add up to me, not that he is any kind of a decent person, he should never have been allowed out of prison to continue his disgusting ways, but thats another story.


Lastly, J & CC don't ring true for me, they claim an involvement in two of the worlds most famous stories Bin Laden and Madeleine McCann, they either are the unluckiest holidaymakers ever, or there is something not quite right with the situation imo

 

[gord]

The odd things about the RH situation for me are,
Jane Tanners statements, never mention a ponytail and specifically mention thick hair longer at the back, she states the man as being 35 -40 a similar age to herself therefore not an age that she would presumalby be guessing at, but RH would have been around 57 to 60 at that point depending on which report you believe (17 to 22 years difference)

From the photos available. RH hair was not very dark and thick, but at best brown/greying and receding quite noticably.

The PJ looked into him and discounted him, the UK police apparently interviewed him about Lesley Molseed and another unconnected case but not Madeleine McCann, why?
It was common knowledge due to the press coverage of the interest made public by Clarence Mitchell so why the public lack of interest from UK police forces that actually interviewed RH?

The Metropolitan police have declined to comment on RH so where is the apparent information coming from, we are told that Operation Grange is not giving a running commentary so how is is that the Daily Mirror are aware of the investigations?
With regard to the Lesley Molseed story, he was definitely linked to the case by witnesses, yet never convicted, there are no stories of him having talked about her in the press, yet we are to believe he couldnt wait to talk to people about Madeleine McCann? it just doesnt add up to me, not that he is any kind of a decent person, he should never have been allowed out of prison to continue his disgusting ways, but thats another story.


Lastly, J & CC don't ring true for me, they claim an involvement in two of the worlds most famous stories Bin Laden and Madeleine McCann, they either are the unluckiest holidaymakers ever, or there is something not quite right with the situation imo

If he didnt have his hair in a pony tail that night then it wouldnt be noticed ?

However I wouldnt put too much faith into her description as she was pretty clear from the off set tha the best she got was a side view - but she claims to have seen someone - even if you just go with long hair and caucasian - it would be a start for investigation - the Gail Cooper one is interesting but I do take the point that they seem to have the ring of people who say what is wanted to be heard

but you have to make sure as detectives - the smallest things break cases and i would have hoped that as this guy did crop up and he certainly was evil enough and had history - so I would wnat to completly find out what this guy was up to who did he assiciate with what was his day to day activity - where waas he on the 3rd etc etc I would hope that he was put through the wringer
There is all sorts of weird things coming out like death bed confessions , links with Gyspies etc If I was a dec on Grange I would certainly be looking closely at this

I dont know how much the PJ are helping , how much access to files they have,

No sure why the mirror has suddenly writing hedlines now - and I dont go with the usual default response that the Mccanns control the press and can dictate what the tabloids write - there maybe is some leaks - but until SY officially reports on what they have found we are just surmising

 

[fabgod]

RH - definitely evil enough, I completely agree and the guy should never have been in a position to live out his life in Portugal or anywhere as a free man for what he did.
Maybe the Mirror got hold of it due to other people talking rather than SY and I agree with you, the smallest clue can break a case wide open, for me RH doesnt sit right but thats just my opinion

 

[SapphireSteel]

If he didnt have his hair in a pony tail that night then it wouldnt be noticed ?
However I wouldnt put too much faith into her description as she was pretty clear from the off set tha the best she got was a side view - but she claims to have seen someone - even if you just go with long hair and caucasian - it would be a start for investigation - the Gail Cooper one is interesting but I do take the point that they seem to have the ring of people who say what is wanted to be heard

Yet you still believe that they are not lying or covering up? :waitasec:

Tanner's first statement to the GNR was that it was too dark for her to see anything at all except pajamas, originally. Her description changed with every telling, but on 27 May 2007 Gerry is on record helpfully saying this to the Sunday Telegraph -

The couple also spoke of their hope that the sighting of a man carrying a child on the night of Madeleine's disappearance could provide a breakthrough. "We feel sure that this sighting of the man with what appeared to be a child in his arms is both significant and relevant to Madeleine's abduction," said Mr McCann. The man, aged between 35 and 40, dressed in a dark jacket and light-coloured trousers and carrying a bundle that could have been a sleeping child, was seen by a friend of the McCanns at 9.30pm on May 3.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id280.html

That would be "bundleman", one of Tanner's many versions of what she didn't see.

Yes these descriptions are credible aren't they....? NOT!!

:lol:

but you have to make sure as detectives - the smallest things break cases and i would have hoped that as this guy did crop up and he certainly was evil enough and had history - so I would wnat to completly find out what this guy was up to who did he assiciate with what was his day to day activity - where waas he on the 3rd etc etc I would hope that he was put through the wringer

"Certainly was evil enough" to be what exactly? Living in a caravan with his family, an hour away?

Can you please provide links proving his "criminal record" or any other "evil" acts, genocide, mass murder, war crimes, serial murder? Why was he free to have 6 kids and roam the countryside?

And as far as being "put through the wringer" the Team McCann investigators chased him all the way to Germany, and then left without speaking to him!



Madeleine Investigation Turns To Farce
4:47pm UK, Tuesday 26 May 2009
Hewlett had been refusing to speak to the McCann detectives
By Martin Brunt
Efforts by private investigators to quiz a new suspect in the Madeleine McCann case have turned to farce.
Raymond Hewlett, 64, agreed to meet the detectives - but they were already waiting to board a flight back to the UK.
They then refused to return to the hospital in Germany where he is being treated for cancer. On Monday, the McCanns' spokesman Clarence Mitchell gave Hewlett an ultimatum to meet the investigators by this morning to "help clear his name". :what: Hewlett, a convicted paedophile, wheeled himself into the car park of the hospital in Aachen and told waiting reporters he would speak to the detectives. "I have nothing to hide. I am willing to talk with them," he said, denying any involvement in Madeleine's disappearance from a holiday apartment in Portugal two years ago. But it was too late.
Mr Mitchell told Sky News: "He should have indicated yesterday that he was happy to talk to us. "We welcome his indication that he will speak to us, but it will have to be rearranged. "That meeting will take place in the near future, but we won't reveal where and when."
http://news.sky.com/story/695430/madeleine-investigation-turns-to-farce


Wait a minute - sorry? The only people who are accusing the man of anything is Team McCann, and here they are demanding he "clear his name" that has only been slurred by them in the first place? How dare they? How preposterous to put a sick, uninvolved man into a position to have to answer to them, like they are the police or something! Random people do not have the rights to demand that others prove they are not involved in an imagined crime. Absurd.

:banghead:

There is all sorts of weird things coming out like death bed confessions , links with Gyspies etc If I was a dec on Grange I would certainly be looking closely at this

Coming out of where? Clarence? I would be having some words with Team McCann directly if I were you, in regards to putting people "through the wringer", as they never did bother to return to question Hewlett. So much for leaving no stone unturned.

The police cleared him years ago. He was always a red herring, PR from Team McCann. Just another unfortunate victim, wrong place wrong time, just like Murat.

I dont know how much the PJ are helping , how much access to files they have,

Quite a lot actually. There is a very close working relationship between Portugal and Britain. Could this be why we've not seen or heard much of the McCann at the moment? They're nervous?


Oporto PJ goes through Madeleine McCann case with a fine toothed comb
• Special team joins the English people from Scotland Yard
• 2.2 million spent to investigate in the UK alone
By Nuno Miguel Maia and Óscar Queirós
09 March 2012
With thanks to Joana Morais and Astro for translation
Almost four years after being archived by the Public Ministry, the case of the disappearance of the little English girl Madeleine McCann in the Algarve is being re-analysed with a fine toothed comb. In Portugal, a team of investigators from the PJ [Judiciary Police] in Oporto has been chosen.
On the United Kingdom's side, Scotland Yard does not haggle the means to find out what happened to little Maddie, whose disappearance in 2007 was archived by the Portuguese Public Ministry in July of 2008. In 2011 alone, 2.2 million euros were spent. And the team comprises 37 people.
Nonetheless, the investigators concluded that nothing would be done without an articulation with Portugal. Therefore, a partnership was established with the PJ, that investigated the case during 14 consecutive months – first under the leadership of Gonçalo Amaral, at the PJ in Portimão; afterwards, under the leadership of the PJ's former joint national director Paulo Rebelo.[/I]

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id409.html

No sure why the mirror has suddenly writing hedlines now - and I dont go with the usual default response that the Mccanns control the press and can dictate what the tabloids write - there maybe is some leaks - but until SY officially reports on what they have found we are just surmising

I don't think that the McCanns "control the press". :lol: I'm sure they'd like to. No, Rupert Murdoch and his cronies control the press in the UK, along with the Establishment via your archaic libel laws, which surely will be dropped in 3, 2, 1...Rupert is on a rampage to get rid of them, so watch them go. I give it 5 years before he gets his way and the libel laws are a relic of the past.

My opinion only of course.

:cow:

 

[Donjeta]

in her statement to the Leceister polioce she said many times that she was uneasy about doing a sketch interview as she only had a fleeting side view of the persons face and it only became important in hindsight

The PJ didnt have the side view face recognition soft ware so she did her best with the expert sketch artist

I have no idea if Hewit is involved - but I will say one thing about the two is that there is not a million miles apart - I mean the length of the hair etc etc - but who knows

I keep on coming back to the point that this guy was a known convicted child offender / who was in the area - I hope the original investigation did a thorough job on his alibi back in 2007

But if there is some strands of a lead that need to be looked at by tye cold case team - why is everyone getting upset about it ??

Personally I am not upset about anything, IDK what anybody else thinks. I am all for the police dragging up lots of the dirt about any and all pedophiles they can think of. Even if those people didn't do anything to Madeleine it could lead to putting them behind bars for child porn or some other offence and save another child.


It just seems to me that the Jane Tanner sighting becomes basically worthless if everybody that gets attention drawn on them could have been the man sighted by Jane Tanner.

I didn't remember Gail Cooper and the charity collector. (thanks for setting me straight about the origins of the sketch, Clutchbag). The coloring of the sketch looks totally wrong to me if it's Hewlett but then I am not really sure why it was thought that the charity collector was likely have something to do with Madeleine.

Gail Cooper back in PDL Helping to FIND MADELEINE - YouTube
One of the suspicious things that the man did was walk on the beach in the rain. Like, you have to be a pedophile to walk on the beach, and particularly if it starts to rain.

 

[SapphireSteel]

All of these sketches and sightings were commissioned by Team McCann.

Diversionary tactics, as was proven over and over again...especially went the McCanns own PI's went to Germany to speak to him, yet left without doing so...:waitasec:

Any guesses or explanations for this glaring oversight, anyone?

TIA

:cow:

 

[fabgod]

Raymond Hewlett criminal history

http://raymondhewlett.blogspot.co.uk/p/raymond-hewlett-timeline.html

Posting only because of a request for his past history, there is no doubt he was a convicted paedophile and also very much suspected of more attacks than he faced justice for.
The disgusting thing is, how little time he spent in prison for the crimes he was found guilty of.
If RH was in fact the "abductor" in the Madeleine case, it would not tally with the Dog alerts, which to my mind cast a massive shadow over the whole abductor theory.
As has been pointed out on other posts, it also seems a stretch to make a near 60 year old fit to a description of a 35-40 year old man with very thick dark hair imo.

 

[Clutchbag]

Raymond Hewlett criminal history

http://raymondhewlett.blogspot.co.uk/p/raymond-hewlett-timeline.html

Posting only because of a request for his past history, there is no doubt he was a convicted paedophile and also very much suspected of more attacks than he faced justice for.
The disgusting thing is, how little time he spent in prison for the crimes he was found guilty of.
If RH was in fact the "abductor" in the Madeleine case, it would not tally with the Dog alerts, which to my mind cast a massive shadow over the whole abductor theory.
As has been pointed out on other posts, it also seems a stretch to make a near 60 year old fit to a description of a 35-40 year old man with very thick dark hair imo.

I think it is extremely safe to say tanners man inhis 30s about 5 8- 5 10 with swarthy skin and with a head of very thick black glossy hair was not the at least 62 yr old RH at the time who was 6 3 with balding thin straggly grey hair