Lying in the Sun

Jane Jimjams & Crecheman

Jane Jimjams & Crecheman


The following are extracts from the witness statements given by the McCann party and others.  They are in reference to the sighting by Jane Tanner and of course the pyjamas!

Tanner's statements/description, shaky at best!

Significant is that the sniffer dogs did not detect the scent of Madeleine, not in the area which Jane Tanner reported to have seen the man carrying the child!

I have highlighted in 'blue' what I consider to be of particular interest.

From McCannfiles

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


Part 1: The GNR arrive

Jane Tanner - Praia da Luz, 03 May 2007, 23.15pm

"Then, at around 11.15, two policemen arrived and I told them.

Later CID arrived. They did this thing called a cognitive technique, where they put you back in the moment,
and it was THEN that I remembered the pyjamas."

- Quoted in The Sun, 20 November 2007



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

'States that other details that may be relevant to the investigation concerns that they were directed to a citizen, of British nationality, who made up the group of tourists together with the family, name of Jane Tanner, and who detected the presence of a suspicious movement of an individual in the immediate area above identified, in the discourse of which was seen transporting a child of an early age.'

- 1st witness statement from the PJ files, 07 May 2007

 



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)



Sylvia Batista (Ocean Club Manager/Translator) - Praia da Luz, 03 May 2007

No mention of Tanner's sighting; '... she also was not told of any abnormal situation which happened.'

- 1st witness statement from the PJ files, 07 May 2007



Sylvia Batista (Ocean Club Manager/Translator) - Praia da Luz, 03 May 2007


'At a given moment, the deponent translated the deposition from one of the ladies that belonged to the group of English people, namely one that she indicates as being a brunette. This lady told the GNR officers, and the deponent translated,
that she had seen a man crossing the road, POSSIBLY carrying a child. The deponent found that situation strange because she was convinced that when she saw this man, the lady was positioned in a spot that has no viewing angle to the location where she had seen the man. She doesn't know exactly where the lady was positioned when she saw the man passing by, but she knows that she indicated that she saw him passing on the street that lies in front of the window to the bedroom where Madeleine was, walking into the direction of the street that leads to the Baptista supermarket.'

- 3rd witness statement from the PJ files, 26 July 2007 (note: 2nd witness statement was based around Robert Murat)

------------------------------------------------------------

 

Part 2: The groups first witness statements

Gerry McCann - witness statement 04 May 2007, 11.15am

'It is emphasised that one of the members of the group, JANE, at about 21h10/21h15, when she was going to her apartment, to check on her children, saw from the back, at a distance of about 50 metres, on the road bordering the club, an individual carrying a child, wearing pyjamas, JANE will be able to clarify this situation.'



Jane Tanner - witness statement 04 May 2007, 11.30am

Meanwhile a man appeared* carrying a child**, with a hurried walk, it being this detail together with the fact that the child dressed in pyjamas, without being wrapped up in a blanket, that caught her attention. She only managed to see him from the side, with the child in his arms. She noticed the individual's presence exactly when she had just passed by Gerry and Jez who were talking, having seen this person step off the pavement that borders on the apartment block where they were staying and rapidly cross the road.

The entrance to the apartment building (1) is exactly at the place (street) where the individual appeared from. After checking on her daughters, she returned to the restaurant. On her way back Gerry was no longer talking in the place where she had seen him. When she arrived at the restaurant Gerry was already there, accompanied by his wife, Kate.

(...)

Personal description:

* Dark skinned individual, male sex, aged between 35 – 40, slim physical appearance, about 1.70m tall. Very dark, thick hair, longer at the back (she could only see him from behind). He was wearing linen type cloth trousers, beige to golden in colour, a "duffy" type jacket (but not that thick). His shoes were dark in colour, classic type. He had a hurried walk.
He was carrying a child, who was lying on both his arms, in front of his chest. By the way he was dressed, he gave her the impression that he was not a tourist, because he was very "warmly dressed".

** About the child whom appeared to be sleeping, she
 only saw her legs. The child appeared to be older than a baby. She was barefoot and was wearing what appeared to be cotton pyjamas of a light colour (possibly white or light pink). She is not certain, but has the impression a design on the pyjamas, possibly a floral pattern, but she is not certain.

As regards these details,
she did not know what Madeleine was wearing at the moment of her disappearance, because she did NOT talk to anyone about this. As concerns the man she saw, she only spoke to Gerald about this, NOT entering into details, and to the police.

When requested, she drew a sketch, which is joined to this statement.

When asked, she says she would probably be able to identify the individual she saw, being able to identify him from the side and from his manner of walking.

Sketch of sighting by Jane Tanner

Jane Tanner's map shows how she saw the mystery man carry Madeleine from points 5 to 8 while Gerry McCann was chatting at point 3

-----------------------------------------

 

Part 3: The groups second witness statements

Gerry McCann - witness statement 10 May 2007, 15.20pm


'Only about 01h00 on 4 May 2007 did he learn through Russell that his companion, Jane, at 21h10, could have seen an individual crossing the top of the road with a child in his arms, that may or may not have been his daughter Madeleine. Asked, he relates that he does not recall to have described exactly the type of pyjamas (colour, designs, etc.) that Madeleine had worn at the time she disappeared.

----------------------
 

Jane Tanner - witness statement 10 May, 16.35pm

'Confronted with the information that the [tracker] dog teams had followed the scent trails in which, purportedly, Madeleine Beth McCann had not passed the intersection where she indicated a man carried a child, she affirmed, immediately, that she was not lying, maintaining the honesty of her initial version.  That, indeed, there had passed in front of her a man carrying, in his arms, a barefoot child. At the time she had not paid him much attention because it is common, at the Ocean Club, for children to pass in the arms of their parents between the crèche and their respective homes, when they have collected them from the baby-sitting service. Only it was strange that the child had no cover (blanket) and the way the man walked, rapidly, and how he was dressed, the trousers were slightly wide their entire length, being straight. They (trousers) were as to colour, identical to "corticite" [a type of floor covering], "chino" style. As for the coat it was dark coloured, she was not able to specify what, seeming to be the same material as the trousers, it being a type of "anorak". As for the footwear she relates that she cannot confirm with certainty but [they were] shoes which enabled the man to be fleet-footed.

About the description of the child, she confirmed that it was being carried in his arms, with the legs in her direction and barefoot. She thought that it was a female child because the pyjamas were a light colour (seemingly pink to her). She never saw the hair of the child. She never saw it move nor make any sound, thinking that it was asleep.

Subsequently, she had no doubts that it could have been Madeleine Beth McCann because, through conversations with Fiona Payne in which [Fiona Payne] described the pyjamas that Madeleine Beth McCann had worn that night, which coincided with those she had seen. Questioned why she had not commented to Kate Healy what she had seen that night, namely that she had seen a male individual who carried a child with pink pyjamas, she relates that she always avoided making this comment to the McCanns so as not to torture them more in their suffering.

She swore "by everything most sacred" that what she said is true, namely that she saw an individual with a child in his arms. Confronted, she demonstrated the distance at which the man with the child had passed her, and that was gauged to be about 5 metres.

She accepts that, at that moment, although the event had called her attention, she didn't lay any great stress on it for the reasons already explained.

-------------------

Rachael Oldfield - witness statement 11 May 2007, 11.30am

'Further to that, about 10 minutes after Kate raised the alarm about the disappearance, the deponent was with Jane in the apartment of the latter. While talking, Jane told her that when she came to see their children, and passed Gerald talking to "Jez", she saw a man with a child, supported in his arms, which would not be a baby and could have been more or less the age of Madeleine. Also she said that when she saw the man, it seemed strange because he was walking very fast and had a child wearing pyjamas, without any other piece of clothing. That she questioned her [about it],  and Jane said to the deponent that at the time she had said nothing because she knew nothing of the disappearance of Madeleine and she had not seen the face of the child. Asked, says that, initially Jane focused more on the description of the man and, ONLY A FEW DAYS LATER did she make reference to the clothes that the child would have worn, which would be pyjamas, not recalling if [when] she made a comprehensive description of clothing, especially of the colour or design.'

--------------------------

 

Part 4: The PJ make the first public appeal, 25 May 2007

Detectives issued a description of a man seen on the night the four-year-old went missing in the resort of Praia Da Luz in the Algarve. Officers said the man was "carrying a child OR an OBJECT that could have been taken as a child".

The man is said to be white, aged 35-40, 5ft 10in tall, medium build with hair that was short on top. He was wearing a dark jacket, beige or golden long trousers and dark shoes. At a news conference, Ch Insp Olegario de Sousa urged the man or anyone who had seen him to come forward.


END


Collusion, Collusion, Collusion - is what springs to mind.  The McCann couple (and others) all very keen to mention the pyjamas that
'Jane saw' but none of them overly eager to describe what 'Jane saw.'   Nope - they all refer the police to JANE!   Jane according to them would be best person to speak to.

They are all overly keen also to point out that Jane came to the conclusion
ALL ON HER OWN that what she saw, the pyjamas she saw were IDENTICAL to those we are told were worn by Madeleine.

And of course Jane would be the best person to speak with, if it was her that saw the man - but it
WAS NOT poor old Jane who CAME UP WITH THE DESCRIPTION of those pyjamas - the others quite obviously played their part 'encouraging' her shall we say, to remember the pyjamas, convincing her, they were JUST LIKE MADELEINE'S!  

Gerry McCann is very careful to state that he had NOT 'let it out the bag' so to speak, the description of Madeleine's pyjamas re-inforcing that Jane decided it all on her OWN.

It is blatantly obvious also from Gerry McCanns statements an element of self-protection always going on.

McCann I note in all of his statements, body swerves anything which might incriminate him - always he refers police to
'speak to someone else'   He is not going to be made responsible for anything, anything at all as far as he can help it.

I think Oldfield discovered this too, to his detriment.  Help out McCann, and he'll pay you back by landing you in shit - because he sure in hell has no intention of taking the 'blame.'

Oldfield now is the last person (McCanns aside) in this McCann drama to have been in that apartment, and that, now that the Met and PJ are both working on this case, must be a difficult position to find himself.

HO, HO,HO - Like McCann, I doubt he had a very merry Christmas either.

And at what point in time Jane Tanner decided she could give an
accurate description of the 'pyjamas' is questionable!

She claims her
'revelation' moment came when she spoke to the police later that night (the night Madeleine was reported as missing) it was then she was able to remember the detail of the pyjamas!

Before this though she had spoken to Fiona Payne and Rachael Oldfield.

I really don't think these three ladies, Collusion, 1,2,3 - didn't speak of the pyjamas - the description!

Put yourself in Rachael or Fiona's position.   A child is missing, your friend's child, taken from her bed the child's mother had told you.  Another friend tells you -
'Oh I saw a man carrying off a child wearing only pyjamas.'

The most natural and obvious thing in the world to do in such circumstance is to firstly - make this known to the parents of the missing child and those searching for her, point them in the direction the man was seen walking, ask the parents what clothing the child was wearing, and then question the friend as to what she saw, ask her to describe EXACTLY what she saw, the clothing of the man, the clothing of the child, so that it could be established if this child was dressed as Madeleine was.

They didn't bother!

Rachael Oldfield claims to have questioned Tanner about pyjamas according to her above statement.   Yet both Rachael Oldfield and Fiona Payne, just 'let it go' told Jane Tanner - Oh be sure not to forget to mention to police when they arrive.'

Is that how you would react on hearing that your friend's child was missing and another friend has quite possibly seen a man carrying her off?'

Such urgency eh?

Interestingly though, Tanner's memory re the detail of the pyjamas occurred on the night the child disappeared when she spoke with police.   Rachael Oldfield said it was a FEW d
ays later before Tanner mentioned this to them?

Some may feel sorry for Jane Tanner, perhaps feel she was the most vulnerable of the group, easiest to manipulate, perhaps sorry too for others in the group, if it is the case they had not realised whatever had become of Madeleine, thinking she had wandered off and had agreed to the timeline, believing she would soon be found - but I don't!

She is an adult, she can speak out.  She has a husband who (if not involved in Madeleine's disappearance) to offer support to face up to McCann if that is what is her problem,if that is who she fears!

Little Madeleine Beth McCann is the victim here NOT Kate and Gerry McCann, and each and every one of this group, have lied, told tales, embellished the events of that night with every word they have uttered.   All done in support of the McCann couple - certainly not to help Madeleine!

The above excerpts from their statements in relation to : When/Where/and to Whom Tanner spoke to re the pyjamas/description -  a perfect example of the protection they have given Kate and Gerry McCann. 

McCann said he first became aware of the pyjamas, when Russell O'Brien filled him in at 01:00 hours on 4th May 2007.

Jane speaks of not having spoken to the McCanns in this regard, yet she also states the only person she spoke to was Gerry McCann and the police!

Takes a little careful reading to establish when she is referring to simply relating her tale of seeing a child with pyjamas, and when she is referring to the actual description of the pyjamas, and at which time she spoke of this to the others - the description, the detail.

They all wanted to get their tuppenceworth in regarding the description of the pyjamas as in making sure this was made known to police, but equally they all wanted to distance themselves from being the ones to have to report this 'sighting' to McCanns or the police - despite knowing on that night that 'holding back' was not going to help find Madeleine!

So I cannot feel sorry for them, not even the snivelling Jane Tanner!

They all know what they have done.  

Dr Goncalo Amaral knows what they have done - he was spot on when he said that Jane Tanner, to deflect from Gerry McCann, had to 'send' the alleged abductor off in the direction which she did!

And it is the direction which is now coming into question once more.  It was questioned when it was Tannerman - questioned more now that he has morphed into Crecheman!

DCI Andy Redwood too knows what they have done.

And they know he knows!

The pyjamas DCI Redwood showed as being those worn by Crecheman's child NOTHING LIKE MADELEINE'S!

If there is one single thing which proves this group, and Jane Tanner, colluded and lied re the pyjamas it is THOSE PYJAMAS WORN BY CRECHEMAN'S CHILD being produced by DCI Andy Redwood!

Tannerman being ditched, and the introduction of 'crecheman and the pyjamas' - leaving McCann with no option but to go along with DCI Redwood (none of the usual crap he would normally come up with when such 'revelations' were announced by Dr Amaral the Portuguese Police) must have McCann feeling pretty much that he has 'lost control' and that won't make him a happy bunny!  Not a nice guy to be around when he is not getting it all his own way I would imagine!

There is no way McCanns are happy at Tannerman being ditched and Smithman now being the focus!  But they have made such a fuss about the Portuguese not doing their job properly, that it would take a British effort to solve the case - they can hardly now begin complaining about the findings and conclusions of DCI Andy Redwood and the Met Officers - even though they are the VERY SAME as those of Dr Goncalo Amaral and the Portuguese Officers!

A situation which I have to admit brings huge satisfaction!



l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com
29th December 2013 

Website Builder