Lying in the Sun

Crecheman & Gerry McCann

Crecheman & Gerry McCann

The introduction of Crecheman by DCI Redwood was met with silence from Gerry McCann and Jane Tanner, that is in public.

Unusual one might think when his introduction does not bode well in many ways for either of them. Crecheman could put paid to Gerry's 'standing on the opposite side of the street from the apartment' story!

And could put paid also to Jane's 'he was carrying the child across his arms, he walked hurriedly' story!

Gerry McCann in particular has always been very defensive of  Jane Tanner's sighting/Tannerman, why in interview with Sandra Felgueiras he stated that Tannerman was almost caught.   Sandra Felgueiras asks him by whom?  McCann in his usual arrogant tone stated - "By Jane"!

There is irony in his vehement defense of Jane's sighting, her description of a man carrying a child.  He trusts in her absolutely on this, her recollection of what she saw, yet he dismisses offhand the part of her statement when she said she saw him, Gerry McCann standing outside the apartment close to the side/back/patio gate, and that she had just edged past Gerry when she saw the man with the child.  

Seems McCann cherry picks which parts of her statement he is prepared to believe.   No surprise that he chose to believe the part where an evil looking man took his daughter, but not the part where he too must have seen it if he was on the street that night at a spot where Jane passed him.  

The reaction by Jane Tanner and Gerry McCann to Tannerman being disposed of by DCI Redwood would be interesting to learn.

Be interesting to learn also the thinking behind DCI Redwood on this one.  

Did he really find a British dad who just happened to be walking the streets with his little daughter, a man who recalled exactly what he was wearing that night, and that more than six years later he could produce the same clothing to don once more to have a picture or two taken by the Metropolitan police, and added to this he had kept also the pyjamas his daughter wore on that night?   A dad who in all of this time never came forward when his description/image was being flashed around the world as the nasty abductor even after he reportedly (says Redwood) had contacted Leicestershire Police in the UK years ago (I guess Redwood couldn't pin this one on Portuguese) he didn't think to demand that his image be removed from the McCann Find Madeleine Website.

More curious, still now, this 'Crecheman' seems unconcerned that his description remains on McCann site as the main suspect in the disappearance of Madeleine.

Now why would that be?  Why would the McCanns not have removed it after Redwood's revelation, and why would this man not insist that they do?

Jane Tanner's sighting was always shaky at best.  Likewise Gerry McCanns story as to which side of the street he stood on that night. And the big performance he put on display for his documentary whereby he tells Jane that he was at the opposite side of the street, and disagrees with her telling of the tale.  She obediently does as she is bid by McCann and allows him to get his own way on this.  She allowed McCann this guy who she said she would not choose as a friend to talk her out of what was her police witness statement.  She allowed McCann to manipulate the situation.   And of course it was something McCann had to get on film.  Which side of the street McCann stood was very important to him, and he was not going to have Jane mess up on this one.  Nothing less than Jane Tanner being submissive, and agreeing with him was going to satisfy McCann.  If Jane had seen Tannerman from the same position as McCann was standing, pretty good chance he had seen him too, and McCann was having none of this.

He knew Tannerman didn't exist, and while happy for Jane to put her neck in the noose and provide him with an alibi, on this count he wasn't about to join her.   

But why did she allow McCann to manipulate her, the situation to his advantage?

Why did McCann not say to her - 'well if you and Jeremy remember me standing, apartment side of the street, lets's go with that, the majority, or let us film both scenarios?'

He didn't, because it did not suit McCanns purpose to have been anywhere, in any position where Jane Tanner could have passed him by and up close.   How then could he deny having seen her if she had done so?   McCann needed to be as far away from her as possible - the opposite side of the street!

So who was/is Jane Tanner and "Tannerman" protecting, as she certainly made it clear she was no fan of Gerry McCann?

Crecheman hopefully will have been able to clarify the position for Gerry where he was standing!

This documentary of McCann was shown around the world.  Shown with McCann standing at the opposite side of the street from where two witnesses, Jane Tanner and Jeremy Wilkins say that he stood. How could she have allowed this to happen?

Did she then give a new statement to Portuguese Police telling them she got it wrong, to amend the discrepancy in her first, to make it now coincide with McCanns version of events?   If not, she should have as there is a documentary out there which does not then tie in with her police witness statement!

But what is Andy Redwood up to by introducing Crecheman?

Did he really discover a British guy who was carrying his kid home?

Tannerman  while he was "on the scene" and while it was accepted by many that he had abducted Madeleine, placed restrictions on the Mets investigation into her disappearance.  The time she was allegedly abducted rigidly thought of as around the time that suited Gerry and Kate McCann, a time which suited their tale of abduction - a time which suited that window of opportunity which Kate McCann spoke of, and at around this time, 9:15 pm,  it also gave Gerry McCann an alibi.  If he was on the street at the very same time as Tannerman, if Jane Tanner saw them both at the same time - then the finger of suspicion would not be pointed at him.   The McCanns and their companions were always "happy" with this time and this sighting of Tannerman, they built their statements their search campaign around it.

DCI Redwood decided though he had other ideas.  Tannerman had to go!  There could be no more Tannerman.

Like Dr Goncalo Amaral the Portuguese Investigation he quite obviously realised Jane's sighting was shaky shall we say.

Getting rid of Tannerman was hailed as a step in right direction by many.   But what was/is Redwood's real reason for needing to make Tannerman disappear - was it the same as the Portuguese Investigation where it was considered that Tanner most probably invented it, or did Redwood have other ideas as to why he wanted rid?

Was he really homing in on the the McCanns and their companions, so invented Crecheman the British dad, playing McCanns at their own game (a deal done with Jane Tanner?) his way of getting rid of Tannerman or was Redwood paving the way for the Metropolitan Police to introduce a series of suspects, suspects which make it appear that the Met are doing a grand job and are about to solve the crimes committed against young Madeleine?  A way of winding this case up - the McCanns and their companions remaining intact!

If Redwood believed that Tannerman was an invention of Jane Tanner's he would know that this guy was never going to be found, and to allow Tannerman to remain suspect number 1 would very much restrict Redwood's investigation.   The Metropolitan Police Investigation had to appear to be making progress, and with Tannerman around that was never going to happen.  How could Redwood claim burglars or anyone else had taken Madeleine when this alleged sighting by Jane Tanner hung over his investigation, a man with a child so close to the McCann apartment?  Did Tannerman have to become a 'real live boy' - Crecheman so as to be eliminated?

In Redwood's big reveal on Crimewatch he said that he was almost sure, he had found who Jane's Tannerman is, almost!

He also said at that time, that it was the British dad when interviewed by Met who said 'hey I think that guy Tannerman could be me'    So it was not the brilliant detective work of the Metropolitan Police which resulted in Redwood's revelation!    Lucky for Redwood then that this man said what he did, and then further produced the old clothing worn on the night. 

s Redwood is covering his ass too with his 'almosts' and his reluctance to accept credit for the discovery of Crecheman.

Crecheman found and created himself according to Redwood.

Now many were delighted, as they had never believed in Tanners tale, so hoped this was Redwood closing in on the real perpetrators of the crimes against Madeleine!

But is it?

I can see how we might think so.   How we might think 'great' this now leaves the Smith sighting of Gerry McCann Man.   But it isn't looking that way, far from it!

Crecheman's introduction left a lot of questions unanswered, that Redwood has to address if we are to believe in a stranger abduction, not least that bedroom door the one Gerry McCann found to be much wider open than he had left it.   The one he closed over before once again leaving his kids alone in the apartment (not having bothered to check who opened the door how it came to be open. His kids alone in an unlocked holiday apartment, clearly according to his tale someone must have been in there with them and opened the door, and yet he just mosey's on out again) the door which when Oldfield arrived 15/20 minutes later was open again.

The bedroom door story by McCann, to be tied in with Redwood's revelation, meant that the alleged abductor had to have been in that apartment before McCann arrived, and that he hung around until just before Kate McCann arrived just before 10pm.

Now what kind of abductor would do that?

Well the type that Andy Redwood hurriedly introduced in the latest Crimewatch - The type who attacks British families when holidaying in Portugal, their very young, and white female children, the type who hangs around in the holiday homes for a while before doing so, even stopping to chat, but who also always avoids being caught by the parents!

And the McCann parents were to be no different, is that what we were being asked to believe by Andy's latest stint on Crimewatch?


Detective Inspector Tim Dobson Metropolitan Police describing the similarities in Madeleine disappearance to those crimes allegedly committed by Andy's latest suspect. 

"Yes there are similarities young white child in bed in holiday apartment on western Algarve, out of season. They described him as a dark tanned male particularly he remained calm and may have spent some time in the apartment beforehand,and he spoke in English, quite good English but with foreign accent."

(Note Dobson's uses the word 'MAY' the intruder MAY have spent some time in the apartment beforehand' in the same way that Redwood used 'almost'

The parents of these kids, did they tell him him?  

These Met officers certainly know how to cover their asses whilst dropping into the mix little speculative comments.

Is this Redwood coming up with not only a suspect but someone who could have been in 5A who MAY have hung around opening and closing doors?

Do we still think he is about to haul in McCann and his buddies for questioning?

There is still that open window but hey, the guy probably needed some fresh air - especially if the culprit may have been Smellyman!

Next Crimewatch will probably tell us how the alleged abductor did it - How he opened the window that is!    The window with only Kate McCanns prints!

Is it time the public heard Crecheman in his own words tell us what and who he saw, heard on that night?

Wonder what Gerry McCann would make of that.  Because Jane most definitely did not 'almost catch' Madeleine's abductor as Gerry McCann so arrogantly and angrily told Sandra Felgueiras.

But then Gerry's silence on this may be due to him being safe in the knowledge, that like Tannerman, there is no Crecheman?
26th March 2014

Website Builder