Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #40

[Zuleika]

Understood. Yes, this is always a possibility. People's memories are extremely fallible, you can apply this logic across most of the remembered "timings" in the PJ files to be fair. Statistics alone will show how unreliable we are in recollecting exact events and timings. Sometimes people read too much into things without appreciating this basic fact.

How could she be confused about the time ? She only made one visit back to her apt. Her telling was the same night not a recollection later .

 

[Mex]

Do you really think it was not premeditated?
IMO it was well planned. I think it was, days before near the apartment lurking around, watching parent's routine. Even if with some luck, no trace. Also the way we wrote his strange letters, strange questions. I really can't see as unplanned or planned for a robbery then escalated. Also time window was too short for that.

There may have been a planned diversion.

Snip
In the minutes after she was abducted a decade a go, local police in Portugal were reportedly diverted to the burglary about 10 miles from the Praia da Luz resort where the McCann family were holidaying.

The phone call to the Lagos police station, said to be from a Lisbon-based alarm systems company, was discovered in a new analysis of police phone records, The Sun reports.

The newspaper reports one of the few police cars available responded to the reported break-in in Odiaxere, northeast of Praia da Luz.
Mystery burglary report call could hold key to solving Madeleine McCann case

 

[onemoremiletogo]

Do you think he could have headed west on R.Dr.Agostinho da Silva ... then crossed R.1° de Maio ... onto R.da Escola Primaria ?

I initially thought that could have been a "good" option. Would avoid to cross OC street (even if short passage) to east (someone coming uphill?!) but on Agostinho maybe too exposed. And exiting by patio door...

 

[Trivento]

I initially thought that could have been a "good" option.

It is a possibility .. as is initially heading west through the car park or lane between apartments and pool .. imo

 

[Deleted member 268165]

I initially thought that could have been a "good" option. Would avoid to cross OC street (even if short passage) to east (someone coming uphill?!) but on Agostinho maybe too exposed. And exiting by patio door...

Tannerman did not exit by patio door. He came from the front of the block.

 

[Mex]

All which have nothing to do with the yet unsubstantiated allegations concerning CB and MM.

It establishes the familiarity CB has with the environs of Luz. It also establishes the triangulation of CB's residence - DM's residence - MM's residence and the short distances in-between.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

Tannerman did not exit by patio door. He came from the front of the block.

Maybe I get confused here with the names - patio door access faces perpendicular to OC entrance street down/uphill? Front door that was/is "on the back"? The one close to the bedroom window?! Small wall on the right / trees when exiting through door/window? Oh get it.

 

[Zuleika]

Maybe I get confused here with the names - patio door access faces perpendicular to OC entrance street down/uphill? Front door that was/is "on the back"? The one close to the bedroom window?! Small wall on the right / trees when exiting through door/window? Oh get it.

Does this help ?

 

[onemoremiletogo]

Does this help ?

Thanks. But I was just get confused with the names/designations-entrance/exit.

 

[Deleted member 268165]

Thanks. But I was just get confused with the names/designations-entrance/exit.

Do not worry, it is also confused in the PJ files. The picture shown by @Zuleika is the patio door. The front door is close to MM's bedroom window.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

Three (of many) possible paths. I walked the three with a 20 kg. bag in some 7 minutes each one.

Thanks. I was there several times, I can recheck my old notes in detail if I find them...
But just in a quick "flash", the way/direction he faced Smith family, wouldn't rule out two of the paths keeping just one as possible?
7 min...wouldn't be too much, too long with a child in his arms?! Ok at night but .. Assuming vehicle not too close but not too far.

 

[Lilly b]

Do not worry, it is also confused in the PJ files. The picture shown by @Zuleika is the patio door. The front door is close to MM's bedroom window.

And there is a car park in front of the front door
In effect the patio doors are the back of the apartment, that looks towards the pool and tapas bar area

 

[Consider Dudley]

Nevertheless, it would be stupid to walk an abducted child through your home town. I don’t think CB is this stupid.

Equally you’d have to be pretty stupid to carry a dead body through town.

 

[Consider Dudley]

What happened - and it did happen - is precisely what police don’t want. They want to form a theory from individual witness accounts. In this case, they received a group theory that may or may not have been influenced by dominant members of the group. Given the risk of prosecution by having left their children unattended, it’s easy to understand the motivation.

We are not going to agree on this and I’m okay with that. But, IMO, collusion between the group is so obvious, I’m troubled that I have to state it.

When you use words like corrupted and collusion it’s very clear where you’re coming from wrt to the Tapas group but it seems Websleuths mods are ok with it and it’s that that I find troubling. It seems I am not permitted to discuss this element of the debate any further however so as you say we will have to leave it there.

 

[Consider Dudley]

Perhaps the met have more of an understanding, they don’t think the sighting is credible.

It is hard to explain how JT walked past GM and JW (Jez?) without being seen and why JT was walking in the opposite direction to Tannerman.

These things have been discussed ad infinitum and I have no interest in going over it again.

Safe to say, I think the sighting has many issues and some of those are not resolved by OG’s dismissal of the sighting as irrelevant.

No but what is resolved is that JT described seeing a man walking near Apt 5a and a man came forward matching her description proving she did not invent him as some have claimed.

 

[Anxala]

How could she be confused about the time ? She only made one visit back to her apt. Her telling was the same night not a recollection later .

Absolutely this. No excuse for confused memories here. We're talking hours, not even days, let alone weeks or months.

But, for what it's worth, I don't believe it was an invention on her part. I think she saw what she saw at the time she said she saw it.

 

[Mex]

How could she be confused about the time ? She only made one visit back to her apt. Her telling was the same night not a recollection later .

JT has never been confused about anything. She knew what she saw and she knew when she saw it.
Her reference points are simple

• she passed GM and JW in conversation in the street
• after passing them she saw a man carrying a child crossing the street
• GM and JW did not see her. Neither did they see the child carrier
• but JT observed all GM - JW and the man ahead of her with the child

Her only confusion was in approximating the exact position of GM, JW and the baby buggy were - no confusion about what she saw.

 

[Mex]

Absolutely this. No excuse for confused memories here. We're talking hours, not even days, let alone weeks or months.

But, for what it's worth, I don't believe it was an invention on her part. I think she saw what she saw at the time she said she saw it.

Absolutely!

 

[Lilly b]

Three (of many) possible paths. I walked the three with a 20 kg. bag in some 7 minutes each one.

Cb could just of been hard faced, parked on the car park, knowing there was no CCTV, as he knows the area and complex, and not walked anywhere
Guess we will just have to wait and see
I suppose the question is where did he take her immediately after?

 

[Anxala]

What happened - and it did happen - is precisely what police don’t want. They want to form a theory from individual witness accounts. In this case, they received a group theory that may or may not have been influenced by dominant members of the group. Given the risk of prosecution by having left their children unattended, it’s easy to understand the motivation.

We are not going to agree on this and I’m okay with that. But, IMO, collusion between the group is so obvious, I’m troubled that I have to state it.

It's not just that it's obvious, it's there as actual fact in the PJ files! Two timelines, the first one created on the night of the 'disappearance', the second one a day later, adjusted to accommodate the 'shortcomings' of the first one.

Which is why I give more credence to Jane Tanner's 'time' account than I do to any of the others. Somewhere along the way, I feel she bore the brunt and ended up a victim of the collusion that created that timeline. JMO.