Digi Tel type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_17563822", true); </SCRIPT>
Of all the inconsistencies, the JT 'bundle man' sighting is the fulcram of the enigma. Consider the following:
The Police were always doubtlul of the validity and reliability of this sighting that they refused to release the details (for fear of misleading the investigation and encouraging copycat sightings) that they only released it following intervention instigated by Gordon Brown.
Why were they reluctant to release it?
JT only 'remembered' sighting 'bundle man' 3 days later, when the Police challenged inconsistences in the initial witness statements.
When she put a time of 9.15 pm on her sighting, it resulted in Oldfield changing his statement to 'fit' her sighting.
Although he initially said that he entered the room to check on Madeleine at 9.30 pm, he now said that he just listened at the door.
JT is certain that she saw Madeleine being carried away, yet thought nothing of it at the time and went to the tapas bar and said nothing.
GM changed his statement at the same time, so that although he entered the apartment at 9.05 pm, he didn't actually see Madeleine in her bed.
The 'Tapas 9' now had an alibi to cover all enventualities. If it was subsequently proved that Madeleine died at 7.30 pm and was disposed of in the Ocean. They now have corresponding witness statements including a sighting of the 'abductor'.
25-08-2007
susie4964 type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_17565016", true); </SCRIPT>
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Strummer The Standard ran this story today, saying the "child" JT saw being carried away was wearing the same Jim Jams as Maddeleine.
It beggars f@cking belief, it really does. |
We went through all of this about 2 months ago! Auntie Philomena is a very stupid woman, sorry, but she's a liability. Jane Tanner's position is exactly the same as the woman in Belgium who swore blind she'd seen Madeleine, when it wasn't her at all. The human imagination is a wonderful thing, and Tanner is merely filling in the details of what she'd like to have seen.
The problem is, of course, that from the McCann camp's point of view, what Jane Tanner THINKS she saw backs up their own theory, i.e. that Madeleine was kidnapped, which feeds back to Tanner and reinforces her probably erroneous belief that she DID see Madeleine.
Who knows what she saw? She saw a man with a bundle, which over the course of a week or so (and don't forget, all of this was in the papers in late May) metamorphosed into a man who was DEFINITELY carrying a child, who was wrapped in a blanket, yet she was still able, in semi-darkness, to see that this "child" was wearing pyjamas similar to Madeleine's! Unless they hypnotise this woman, they'll never get the truth out of her - in fact I'm quite surprised they haven't.
Dancing Girl type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_17598547", true); </SCRIPT>
All I know is if I saw a man walking away with a child I recognised I would IMMEDIATELY DO SOMETHING, approach him, run after him etc., at the very least follow him and get a license number etc. Like a lot of what has happened regarding Madeleine McCann so much has been misquoted, totally changed, conflicting statements/timescales/half truths etc leaked to the media but not confirmed. Aunty Phil has made so many announcements which have turned out not to be correct. I would have thought that Team McCann would had banned her from speaking in public about this case!! Personally I have read various reports on this supposed "sighting" from "carrying a bundle", to "it looked like a child", to......"I know it was Madeleine!!!!". WHY did Jane Tanner take THREE DAYS TO REPORT THIS to the police, if she saw Madeleine abducted!!!!!! Like an awful lot that has happened in this case, it does not make any sense. Quite frankly the whole case stinks and there is something very, very wrong here. I have felt that from just about day one.
galena type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_17658780", true); </SCRIPT>
I thought at the time it was bad enough if she really saw a child being carried off in a blanket and did nothing to prevent it. But if she was SURE at the time it was Maddie and just hung around while someone carried off her friend's child it really beggars belief. I have been suspicious of this woman's evidence from the first but now she is really insulting our intelligences ...
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
First 