The first police responders to the call about the disappearance of a child were immediately told by the witness to the event, that she had seen a man carrying a child walking from the direction of the apartment from which MM was missing,
None of which matters any more. IMOThe information quoted was not released until 2013 and was not considered as evidence in 2007 even for elimination purposes.
That witness had a very distinctive appearance and was not recognised by JT despite her watching his tennis match with GM.
Snip
(MM's father GM) was seen with DrJT on May 3, 2007 by witness Jane T
________________________________
Ian Horrocks, a retired Met detective who has done extensive work on the MM case believes Ms Tanner may have seen the abductor.
'It would appear that Dr JT was known by sight to Jane Tanner. Therefore, is it credible that she would not have recognised him?'
Gerry McCann played tennis with Tannerman on day Maddy went missing
Gerry McCann was seen playing tennis with Dr Julian Totman on May 3, 2007 by Jane Tanner at the Portugal resort. She later spotted him again carrying his daughter but did not recognise him.www.dailymail.co.uk
It certainly does verify exactly how shoddy the collecting of evidence was in 2007 and the problems caused by investigators who have already decided on a culprit and discarding evidence which doesn't fit with that preconception.
Dr JT is another witness not interviewed in 2007 and not interviewed until Operation Grange bothered to do so.
Which brings us back to the present day when evidence has been followed and used to confirm a very credible prime suspect for the first time in over sixteen years.
In which the Dr T evidence is quite obviously not that subsequently followed by investigators, whereas it is perfectly possible Jane T's might well be.
My opinion
Absolutely correct.
True, but only if he is charged with abduction.
Highly unlikely scenario IMO
The Smith sighting is also a possible sighting of a an alleged abduction, OG didn't move the time line just for fun.The only eye witness to the possible abduction was JT who could only describe what she saw and she has never deviated from her statement.
It is an internet factoid that she identified anyone and as such will never be raised by a competent defence whether to instigate doubt or anything else.
On the other hand although JT never saw the man's face it does raise the pertinent question of the face altering operation CB apparently underwent shortly after MM was abducted.
Snip
MM suspect CB 'had face changing op months after toddler went missing'
CB, a convicted paedophile and rapist, had his jaw reset and four 'rabbit' teeth straightened during a procedure at a private dental clinic in his native Germany ...
Madeleine McCann suspect 'had face changing op after she went missing'
Brueckner, a convicted paedophile and rapist, had his jaw reset and four 'rabbit' teeth straightened during a procedure at a private dental clinic in his native Germany, according to a TV investigation.
Now that might be pertinent evidence if raised at a trial.
My opinion
This is why we've surmised if the BKA go for murder then 5a is unlikely to figure, although I'm sure FF may well think otherwise.
It is obvious that the only individual of any interest to the authorities in the MM investigation is CB. The only individual against whom there is evidence enough to make him prime suspect is CB.
I don't think this is relevant to the MM investigation which has not yet been concluded and for which no indictment has been made.
Maybe the alibi which so convinced MWT will be brought into play here?
I took note of that when I spoke of it in the past tense; however I'm sure most people will be hoping that all will be reinstated in the fullness of time when the jurisdiction question is resolved. The evidence against CB which allowed him to be charged with the crimes didn't vanish with that, it still exists.
