Thursday, February 23, 2012

#McCann :How Jane Tanner Got Lost In A Crowd On An Empty Street

One can accept that on a night out with friends, drinking wine and chatting - maybe some folks are not perfectly correct with the exact time someone came and went.

However, some things should be pretty clear and easy to remember about the night of and the day after a horrific event.

Of all the Tapas 9 claims as to how things went down on the evening of May 3, 2007, JaneTanner´s 9:15 (approximate) sighting of a man hurrying along Dr Augusthino da Silva with a child draped in his outstretch arms is the most unbelievable and unsupportable.

Let's ignore for now the issues of the lighting and whether Jane would be able see the details of the man and child's clothing so well.

In order to prove whether she could or she could we would have to test her ability with a number of crime reenactments with the present lighting and, if one was able to see what she saw under those conditions, then one would have to use quite a bit of scientific and technical skill to build a set with the calculated lighting of that night and time and see if one could still see those details. I cannot obviously due that at this time, so I cannot make any absolute determinations on her ability to see what she said she saw.

However, I can comment on what Gerry and Jeremy (Jeremy Wilkins, also called Jez) said they didn't see - namely Jane.

Retired British police officer, PM, and I reenacted the scenario and I learned something very interesting.

If Gerry's claim that he crossed the street, the Rua Dr Gentil Martins (in his later statement, not his first which only said on his way back to the Tapas, he "crossed ways" which should mean "ran into," not ran across the street to talk to) to speak to Jeremy is true, then it is indeed possible for the two men to have neither seen Jane nor any man carrying a child across the street at the corner whilst they were conversing.

PM took thirteen steps to cross from one side to the other and I saw him out of the corner of my eye from the spot Gerry says he was standing with Jeremy.

If, as Peter reminded me as we discussed the way men chat and the way women chat, that men tend to talk less face to face as women, but more at angles, looking about themselves and not at each other, it would be totally possible for the men to have their backs to the street behind and never see a men quickly walk by, even if it took him thirteen strides.

Interestingly, if they are looking down at a baby in a pram or off to the left side of the street, they might actually have not seen Jane go by either.

But, Jane denies that is how it went down and Jeremy agrees with her.

Both state Jerry and Jeremy were on the same side of the street Jane walked up and Jane claims she was right on top of them when she walked by.

Now, I would say, if this was true, it doesn't matter where these men were looking while talking; at least one would see Jane, and, more likely, both of them.

And, if they were positioned in such a way that both of their backs were to Jane as she came up behind them, they would have seen the man crossing directly in front of them.

 If they had their backs to the man behind them, they couldn't have missed Jane walking straight at them.

No matter exactly how they were standing, it is hardly believable that neither man would notice the only other person on the street trotting right up to them, past them, and on to the end of the street.

Anyone on the street at that time of night at a time when Praia da Luz is very empty would very likely catch one's attention, so Jane didn't get lost in the crowd.

Let’s double check their position with Jane’s Rogatory Statement which she had months to get the “facts” more