Open letter to Crimewatch

It seems like airing this at the time of the trial is geared to take UK media attention off the trial and to garner support for the abduction theory and I am sure for the Fund.

However be that as it may

(5) The man shown in the documentary as carrying a child away from near the McCanns’ apartment did not look the same as Jane Tanner’s description. In any case, of course, Jane Tanner admitted to not seeing his face.

Didn't Redwood himself say that the man Tanner saw was another parent carrying his child from the crèche, so why would they even talk about that "sighting" if it's been discredited by SY? Much less have his efit anywhere.

It is unlikely someone new would see the show and thing hang on, I did see a brunette man in Portugal 7 years ago when I was there, and he had on a dark jacket and chinos like this guy -- but it's possible it could happen if you'd been buried under a rock since May 2007 -- however if this is the description Tanner provided of the person she saw-- who is no longer a POI according to redwood - what possible use is it to put him on a Crimewatch program? What if the abductor had short blond hair and was 7 feet tall and abducted her into a car in the car park and never walked anywhere?

This seems worse than useless, it's misleading.

LJC wrote:

Panda wrote:

I just find it very strange that one day Redwood says they are concentrating on phone lines etc , no mention of Crimewatch which must have been filmed already and he knew that , then he comes up with an E-Fit, includes the McCanns so now the McCanns are going to show it on their website.!!!! I give up.

Why is that strange Panda?

We can't have it both ways.  Either they are competent or incompetent.  IMO they would be incompetent if they did not explore phone records and incompetent if they did not do a reconstruction themselves and incompetent if they were to tell the likes of us everything that they are doing.

Thanks for the thumbs up wjk  Yes, I have to be positive, no other way to be and I do think there is too much doom and gloom and negativity on this site at times.

Agree that they would be incompetent not to do a reconstruction but also incompetent not to do a number of other things which they may not alert the media to, or alert McCanns to, so they can run for the legal team - like check out the phone records thoroughly.

I don't think it's odd to see a man carrying a child home around ten PM in a resort town with crèches that exist just so that parents can drop the kids off and go (safely) to have a quiet dinner. You would expect to see that. Many people probably did see that. If not that night then another night, that 7 + years later they could confuse in their mind.

Was there any new evidence?

That they did this on Crimewatch could be telling us they have not gotten any further than the PJ, and are grasping at straws trying to generate someone who saw something that they NOW recall 7 years later - which happens I guess - or that they are pacifying McCanns, either to shut them up - one possible response to Kate's expectation that they "work with her" -  or in order to get further cooperation while they actually dig deeper into contradictions.

Who is to say that the person who calls in won't also say, I saw a guy walking with a kid, he looked like Gerry McCann?  It took them years to find out Bundleman was a parent and not a POI so maybe they think one more bite at the cherry can't hurt.