Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #40

[Mex]

It’s impossible to understand how she thought they were on the opposite side of the street and that they didn’t see her.

No it isn't.
There was no "collusion" regarding JW encounter with GM returning to the tapas. He is a truly independent witness.

There is no doubt that JT left the tapas prior to GM returning. She saw G and J standing together in the street and she saw the man carrying a child crossing the road from the direction of the apartment from where it would be later found a child had been abducted.

JT saw what she saw and that is on record in the PJ files. GM and JW corroborated they were having a conversation in the street at that time when JT passed them by. That too is in the files. They neither saw her or the man at the top of the road which is also on record in the files.
The timing is also recorded in the files for the three holidaymakers; the fact that the two in conversation didn't see the third passing them by is not extraordinary particularly if they passed where the pavement broadens into the lane behind the apartment block.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Thanks for taking the time to share and detail your view.

Totally agree in regards to previous OC intrusions and same pattern (window), and definitely when you write at some point that week the crime became premeditated. Exactly my thoughts.
Very good point, the re-registering of the car. I do not recall the details, but even if the abduction was premeditated that week, would this make the re-registering so unlikely to occur on the day after? Also unlikely but could it be related with the phone call? Too much complex looking to CB's profile...
I initially tought re-registering could serve more as a tentative alibi(?!) of not being where he was.
If Jaguar had significance to the crime, how? To distract from the typical "hippy bus" and used for the disposal of the injured party?
Just speculative notes...I don't recall if some might not even be possible anymore considering some known facts.

But don’t you think it’s all reverse engineered to fit the suspect who is a burglar and a paedophile who planned sexual offences sometimes and others he acted impulsively.

The whole way of thinking is to match CB and his profile to a burglary which was casually planned based on past crimes and then at some point evolved into a child abduction.

What I am certain of is that the crime was either planned or opportunistic and very lucky. Not some weird hybrid devised to match CB’s profile.

 

[Mex]

From official sources in Portugal it's been denied that there has ever been such an apology .

Sorry I think you are wrong.

I have seen Journalists claiming this as you have quoted but Nowhere have I seen an official denial that an apology was made; nor have I seen a retraction from the original source which is the BBC that an official complaint been made which would have happened was there a grain of truth in these anonymous (but for journalist by-lines) tabloid claims.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

No it isn't.
There was no "collusion" regarding JW encounter with GM returning to the tapas. He is a truly independent witness.

There is no doubt that JT left the tapas prior to GM returning. She saw G and J standing together in the street and she saw the man carrying a child crossing the road from the direction of the apartment from where it would be later found a child had been abducted.

JT saw what she saw and that is on record in the PJ files. GM and JW corroborated they were having a conversation in the street at that time when JT passed them by. That too is in the files. They neither saw her or the man at the top of the road which is also on record in the files.
The timing is also recorded in the files for the three holidaymakers; the fact that the two in conversation didn't see the third passing them by is not extraordinary particularly if they passed where the pavement broadens into the lane behind the apartment block.

You failed to state this as your opinion; which it is. Needless to say, my opinion is different.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Sorry I think you are wrong.

I have seen Journalists claiming this as you have quoted but Nowhere have I seen an official denial that an apology was made; nor have I seen a retraction from the original source which is the BBC that an official complaint been made which would have happened was there a grain of truth in these anonymous (but for journalist by-lines) tabloid claims.

There is no official apology though either. Everything seems to stem from the panorama documentary. Can you provide a source with the comments attributed to an actual person i.e. a named source.

If not, both the apology and denial should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[Mex]

You failed to state this as your opinion; which it is. Needless to say, my opinion is different.

It is not my opinion. It is fact as recorded in the PJ files and considered when the PJ were collating their final report for the Attorney General.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

It is not my opinion. It is fact as recorded in the PJ files and considered when the PJ were collating their final report for the Attorney General.

I agree tge JW was the only independent witness. It is my very firm opinion that if JT had walked past him at that time, he would have seen her. Your opinion is different, which I understand, nevertheless, it is an opinion.

 

[Mex]

I have already said the news was communicated via Portuguese television and in BNN - Breaking
,which reports breaking news around the world .

You cannot provide an accredited cite from a named individual within the Policia Judiciaria

 

[misty48]

I agree tge JW was the only independent witness. It is my very firm opinion that if JT had walked past him at that time, he would have seen her. Your opinion is different, which I understand, nevertheless, it is an opinion.

There is always the possibility that Dr T saw JT at the same time he placed himself in the vicinity, even if it wasn't Dr T whom JT actually saw crossing the top of the road.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

But don’t you think it’s all reverse engineered to fit the suspect who is a burglar and a paedophile who planned sexual offences sometimes and others he acted impulsively.

The whole way of thinking is to match CB and his profile to a burglary which was casually planned based on past crimes and then at some point evolved into a child abduction.

What I am certain of is that the crime was either planned or opportunistic and very lucky. Not some weird hybrid devised to match CB’s profile.

I can even understand how it may seem worked to match his profile, but, in fact, he showed himself to be meticulous when the risk was high, but too relaxed when the danger was lower. A "variant profile". And maybe some other cases that may haven't be reported...
I really think he planned the abduction (although not in so complex way as I was speculated above).
He may also have shown occasionally to be foul-mouthed when drunk.
And yes, very lucky.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

There is always the possibility that Dr T saw JT at the same time he placed himself in the vicinity, even if it wasn't Dr T whom JT actually saw crossing the top of the road.

Dr T, IMO, wasn’t who JT saw. He was found within the files and presented the perfect opportunity to move the investigation in another direction. Again, my opinion but the new direction towards Smithman was a more fertile place to look.

 

[Mex]

There is always the possibility that Dr T saw JT at the same time he placed himself in the vicinity, even if it wasn't Dr T whom JT actually saw crossing the top of the road.

Agreed.
As far as the initial investigation is concerned DrT does not exist despite giving a statement to police at the time. He only appears as a direct result of Operation Grange investigations.
OG would not have asked only what he was doing but they would have asked what was going on around him and what he had seen. We don't know what information he might have passed on of significance to the wider picture.

 

[misty48]

Dr T, IMO, wasn’t who JT saw. He was found within the files and presented the perfect opportunity to move the investigation in another direction. Again, my opinion but the new direction towards Smithman was a more fertile place to look.

There was no reason PJ couldn't have "found" him before he left Luz just over a week after Madeleine had disappeared. I do wonder what or who he saw that evening as he returned to his apartment from the creche.

 

[Mex]

I can even understand how it may seem worked to match his profile, but, in fact, he showed himself to be meticulous when the risk was high, but too relaxed when the danger was lower. A "variant profile". And maybe some other cases that may haven't be reported...
I really think he planned the abduction (although not in so complex way as I was speculated above).
He may also have shown occasionally to be foul-mouthed when drunk.
And yes, very lucky.

From what I know of detective work it is considered important to build a profile of the lawbreaker. It is not the fault of investigators that CB has an almost perfect profile which fits crimes against MM and others it is all down to CB who worked hard on his own profile since before leaving Germany for the Algarve.
There is an element of luck but he avoided a lot of comeback by using his wheels to stay one jump ahead.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

There was no reason PJ couldn't have "found" him before he left Luz just over a week after Madeleine had disappeared. I do wonder what or who he saw that evening as he returned to his apartment from the creche.

It depends on one’s motivation. The PJ obviously didn’t think Dr T was the abductor, not least, because he was walking in the opposite direction. Hence, what was there for the PJ to find?

Motivated to move the investigation in a direction away from Tannerman and towards Smithman, OG’s opinion that Dr T was the former enabled this.

 

[Consider Dudley]

Dr T, IMO, wasn’t who JT saw. He was found within the files and presented the perfect opportunity to move the investigation in another direction. Again, my opinion but the new direction towards Smithman was a more fertile place to look.

So simply a coincidence that Dr T was in the right place at the right time, looking almost exactly as JT described and carrying a small female child? What ARE the chances??!

 

[mrjitty]

It depends on one’s motivation. The PJ obviously didn’t think Dr T was the abductor, not least, because he was walking in the opposite direction. Hence, what was there for the PJ to find?

Motivated to move the investigation in a direction away from Tannerman and towards Smithman, OG’s opinion that Dr T was the former enabled this.

IMO they gave her an off ramp

It's clear her evidence was always a hot mess. It's clearly not credible she walked pass Gerry and friend in that small street and neither noticed. I don't think there is much to that. It simply shows why it was bad that they all compared notes and contaminated their versions. But at the time she worked through all this, she wasn't aware how significant it would all become. I think the same on some of the others. They gave perhaps self serving accounts, that don't really work.

Most of these issues are to be expected, but its' extra problematic when all the witnesses discussed their evidence first, had been drinking etc

 

[RichardKimble]

There is always the possibility that Dr T saw JT at the same time he placed himself in the vicinity, even if it wasn't Dr T whom JT actually saw crossing the top of the road.

But also we know that the person identified by Redwood saw nothing suspicious, Redwood moved it on to Smithman .So it's possible three persons carrying children, only one child fitting a description close to that of MM, what are the chances of this sighting not being the one.

 

[misty48]

It depends on one’s motivation. The PJ obviously didn’t think Dr T was the abductor, not least, because he was walking in the opposite direction. Hence, what was there for the PJ to find?

Motivated to move the investigation in a direction away from Tannerman and towards Smithman, OG’s opinion that Dr T was the former enabled this.

If PJ had taken note of Dr T's claims that he thought he could have been Tannerman then they could have moved the investigation forward at a far earlier stage. Of course, locating a man the Smiths would not recognise again could have been rather problematic if that person actually was the abductor and made it far more difficult for innocent people to be accused of crimes they didn't commit. CB wasn't Smithman imo.

 

[Deleted member 268165]

It’s impossible to understand how she thought they were on the opposite side of the street and that they didn’t see her.

Imagine you are in a Paddle field (20 meters x 10 meters) at night, with sodium lights but enough to see a person quite well. I was there alone at night, and a cat apperaed and called my attention. In any position at least one of the two (GM or JW) should had seen JT.

IMO JT heard the conversation in the table about GM talking with JW, and a false memory was created. But she saw the abductor in her 21:50 walk.