Why did JT not organise a search?

One of the strangest things are the references to Jane Tanner's 'sighting' on the scrawled out Timelines in Madeleine's sticker book.


TIMELINE 1

9.20/5 - Ella Jane checked 5D sees stranger & child


TIMELINE 2


9:20pm Jane Tanner checks 5D - [sees stranger walking carrying a child]



So why, instead of searching for the 'stranger carrying the a child', were they wasting valuable searching time drawing up timelines? And how could Gerry state that he was unaware of JT's 'sighting' until many hours later when there are two references included in their own hand-written timeline?

Matt goes to 5a to check the twins.

I agree Autumn and anyone in this real situation would be out on the streets searching. Why were they thinking of their daughter Ella at this time?

Hi Jd16 odd that the name 'Ella' is crossed out twice on their hand-written Timelines

Timeline 1
8:45. pm

Matt returns 9.00-9.05 - listened at all 3
- all shutters down

Jerry 9.10-9.15 in the room + all well
? did he check

9.20/5 - Ella Jane checked 5D sees stranger & child

9.30 - Russ. Ella Matt check all 3

9.35 - Matt check see twins

9.50 - Russ returns

9.55 - Kate realised Madeleine

10pm - Alarm raised



Timeline 2

8.45pm. all assembled at poolside for food

9.00pm. Matt Oldfield listens at all 3 windows 5A, B, D ALL shutters down

9:15pm Gerry McCann looks at room A ? Door open to bedroom

9:20pm Jane Tanner checks 5D - [sees stranger walking carrying a child]

9.30 Russell O'Brien in 5D. Poorly daughter
l
9.55pm

10:00pm. Alarm raised after Kate

Gerald

ETA - Time line 2 is the top one and Timeline 1 the bottom, sorry got them wrong way round.

Autumn wrote:Hi Jd16 odd that the name 'Ella' is crossed out twice on their hand-written Timelines

Very odd. There is obviosuly a reason why Ella is on their minds to make the mistake of writing it down twice and in relation to 2 different people

could it be that Jane Tanner is also known as Ella Jane Tanner, and them not meaning Ella the daughter.

tanszi wrote:could it be that Jane Tanner is also known as Ella Jane Tanner, and them not meaning Ella the daughter.

I don't know...is this jane tanners proper name Ella Jane Tanner? if so, why do they never call her Ella? Its a bit like Maddie or Madeleine....just when it suits to get round the fairytale

But then why did they cross Ella off twice? Has to be a reason

jd16 wrote:

tigger wrote:

This is Robert Murat!!!!!!! Can't you see!!!

Her name is Jane Michelle Tanner.

http://duartelevyen.wordpress.com/2009/05/06/maddie-a-two-year-old-%E2%80%9Cpact%E2%80%9D/

Thanks almostgothic, so lets get this right....Maddie has gone missing and they think twice to write down Ella's name and cross it off in relation to 2 different people in their timelines, with no mention of Maddie, not even what time she went to bed or anything, no mention of the M word.....anyone smell a rat!!!

Re the timelines:
I think the 'Ella' was just to show that JT checked on her.

There are two different sets of handwriting on the timelines? The A of Alarm raised in timeline one is quite different to that in timeline two.

The meeting with Jeremy isn't mentioned. Was that the reason JT went ahead with the sighting at 9.20?
Sorry, such a long time ago, will have start all over again with the Jeremy topic, because J's perception of time differed wildly from Gerry's?
Gerry can't have mentioned this when the timeline was drawn up, so did Jeremy volunteer this himself?

They must have known that it's immediately obvious from the timeline that they weren't checking between 9.35 and 10.00?
Why leave both timelines?
Why is Gerry 'Gerry McCann' in one entry and underneath apropos of nothing, written 'Gerald'. Are we getting posh here?

Sorry if these are old questions, but at the time I didn't go into their convoluted timelines - best thing about that is that DP hammered out a third timeline, typed on three pages of A4 and distributed these amongst the T9. Talk about reading from the same song sheet!
They were most surprised when the PJ would not allow them to take these crib sheets with them for their interviews.

jd16 wrote:Thanks almostgothic, so lets get this right....Maddie has gone missing and they think twice to write down Ella's name and cross it off in relation to 2 different people in their timelines, with no mention of Maddie, not even what time she went to bed or anything, no mention of the M word.....anyone smell a rat!!!

Extraordinary isn't it that there's no mention of Maddie...is Ella JT's daughter she has 2 doesn't she? But why mention her twice by mistake (and you have to assume that its a mistake they made twice as 'Ella' is crossed through twice) so why was she on their minds at that time when focus should have been Maddie?

Hi tigger their own Timelines have always been a puzzle to me. Were they intended for their own use or the GNR's. Were they handed over willingly or taken against the group's wish?


Terms of seizure:

At this time, it is considered of interest to the investigation to attach to the present deed, two covers of a child's book, on the inside covers of which is a schedule for supervision, hand-written by one of the McCann couple's group of friends and participant in this deed by name of Russell O'Brien.

I think Jane Tanner's story could have been more plausible (to the PJ) if say, they concocted the story that Jane had informed Kate (and the rest of the scummy bunch) on what she had seen, a little girl (wearing pyjamas and NO shoes on her feet) in the arms of a man Kate runs off realises Maddie is missing and cries THEN "abduction" - they couldnt even get that straight - hence numerous changes in description.

Lillyofthevalley wrote:

jd16 wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:I remember the very earliest reports that said JT had seen a man 'carrying a bundle that could have been a child.' There was much speculation on fora at that time that it could have been someone carrying a bundle of laundry. 'The bundle that could have been a child,' eventually became a child wearing Maddie's pyjamas.

You just have to laugh at how ridiculous this whole scam is....No-one with an IQ above their age can take these 'stories' & sightings seriously they are just preposterous

From a bundle of laundry to a child wearing Maddies pyjamas...Love it!!

I cannot believe the mccanns & their cronies believe people actually are taken in by their fairytale. Sometimes its like reading a fiction book by Enid Blyton when reading the facts

jd16 dont forget the fridge that Gerry took to the local tip because it broke!!!!

exactly I mean come on! would the Yard seriously believe that one has to replace their own fridge whilst vacationing in a resort - totally unfathomable, if the Yard believe this then we are in serious trouble and if David Cameron allows a whitewash(which I doubt) he is going to look like a real idiot - sadly conclusions will not be made public, but surely DC knows the power of the net and everything about the gruesome twosome and their cronies are on record for all to see.

Not many people know this, but the Eggman went on to become a celeb and entered into the world of showbiz, hiding in plain sight, as you can see!

ann_chovey wrote:

That was O'Brien.

thank you for correction, it was o'brien i meant but was reading something else at the time

why 'stranger'?

why not 'man'?

Ella is the eldest daughter ...one month younger than Madeleine .


Perhaps she was on their mind for a reason .

Autumn wrote:

Hi tigger their own Timelines have always been a puzzle to me. Were they intended for their own use or the GNR's. Were they handed over willingly or taken against the group's wish?


Terms of seizure:

At this time, it is considered of interest to the investigation to attach to the present deed, two covers of a child's book, on the inside covers of which is a schedule for supervision, hand-written by one of the McCann couple's group of friends and participant in this deed by name of Russell O'Brien.

Interesting, I didn't know that those two timelines might have been taken either by the GNR or the PJ that evening. No wonder they had to start a new, improved timeline, which I have not seen reproduced anywhere.

They all really seemed to think that it was a done deal, didn't they? Tell the police the child is abducted, we aren't bad parents, we checked all the time. Here is the timeline, this is what happened, here are the photographs - ready to go. Interviews the next day and end of that part of the story.

AnnaEsse wrote:Not many people know this, but the Eggman went on to become a celeb and entered into the world of showbiz, hiding in plain sight, as you can see!

Expect a spate of sightings of him around Easter!

What should they be searching for, a man carrying a bundle of clothes that might have been a child? Because that's what the initial description was.
It was only later that the "bundle of clothes" managed to morph into a pair of PJs with a child inside them. Carried by a man who suddenly grew a face.
If Jane's "descriptions" are any sort of benchmark, she'd have trouble organising a piss up in a brewery.

Autumn wrote:

AnnaEsse wrote:Not many people know this, but the Eggman went on to become a celeb and entered into the world of showbiz, hiding in plain sight, as you can see!

Expect a spate of sightings of him around Easter!

I think he did have a car. I saw it in the car park at Tesco.

mossman wrote:

ann_chovey wrote:

That was O'Brien.

thank you for correction, it was o'brien i meant but was reading something else at the time

O'B is obviously a dab hand at the workings of washing machines, they had to call someone out to show KM how to work theirs.